Antipodeslonghaul

It's simply one of the best computer games. And it's also a sim.

MUC-KHG in the 737-700 Lucky Air, about 6 1/2 hours. KHG could potentially be a good hub for a low cost carrier. Plenty of tourist attractions, the Silk Road. It looks like the 737-700 can get to London, Tokyo, Addis Ababa, Jakarta etc. nonstop from there. Most of Asia and Europe and at least a chunk of Africa, so would make an interesting hub for single aisle cheap flight operations.

One temporary solution that might work would be disabling your internet connection while starting the sim. And you'll probably get some sort of message, continue in offline mode. Once the sim has loaded you should be able to go back online and it should run normally. But only a temporary solution as eventually one has to update.

For me this statement in particular is the primary thing that invites dragging MSFS 2020, and probably soon 2024 as well, through the mud and urinating on them. It's a statement I've seen frequently, and I'm not entirely against it, since it's also the sim I use the most at present. But maybe that's just in my nature. If someone tells me some Mexican restaurant is the best ever, I'll likely try it and then say it's more or less the same as Taco Bell. But MSFS2020 is really just an average sim in my opinion, quite good graphics, but also severely lacking in many areas. So overall it never really stood out as being something unique or special.

I've recently flown around LA, like Burbank to Ontario for example, when doing short test flights for graphics settings etc. Of course no need to follow SID's or any other procedures, just mess around with flying low. The reason I like it there (at least in the sim) is the mixture of mountains and canyons, combined with the vast sprawl of freeways, different styles of buildings, malls, parking lots, stadiums, etc. MSFS really does a great job depicting what you see out the window. Good if you can show it to some people who haven't seen it yet.

Interesting indeed. What was it about 28 minutes (circa 400 kts av gs)? I'm just simming now and opened FlightRadar24, used filter for 737-900, looking at UAL1984 EWR-SDQ. Now that's only about a 3:15 flight, so maybe quite a bit lighter, but let's see. Right now passing 20,000, 10 minutes, and about 50 nm. Edit: Of course not all will climb in the same manner SID's, ATC limitations etc. This one should be reaching FL330 any moment now. Looks like it took them about 22 minutes and about 130 nm.

Weird thing. I normally fly the PMDG BBJ1, but yesterday tried the regular 737-700 passenger version. Seemed to get quite a bit better performance, lower temps, could raise fps limit on RivaTuner. Maybe just coincidence though. Unrelated, but I lost all my sim settings today. While trying to start the sim, popup message said you're already signed into X Box on another device. No idea, I have no other devices. Then after entering my sign in credentials, all sim settings (graphics etc.) were back to default. Since I hadn't taken notes, I couldn't tell what my settings were yesterday when I got the great performance. But this issue might be caused by clicking the sim off at the end of the day by simply shutting down the window, rather than going back to the main menu first and exiting the sim properly. Not sure.

I wasn't getting that popup message just now, but no live weather, no marketplace either.

Quite a few Youtubers seem to like Innsbruck, so I tried it recently and thought it was great trying it myself. So maybe from some nice Mediterranean airport like Palermo to there would be good.

I've been following this guy's videos a bit, plus Q8 Pilot recently showing the HotStart CL650, seeing comments it's the best simulated plane period, so to me presumably it's also within the best sim. I only used FSX SE until recently, but then got MSFS 2020 as well. I don't have X Plane yet, but getting edgy, feel like I'm missing something. Needless to say I'm not entirely happy with MSFS. Although not entirely disappointed either, it looks and works quite allright, it just doesn't feel quite that right. I still like my PMDG 747 in FSX much better than anything I've tried in MSFS. Scenery seems to be only part of the bigger picture. How a sim feels is important too. X Plane 12 seems to have very good scenery anyway. Weird, a couple of months ago all I was seeing was X Plane and P3D are already dead etc. MSFS is the only way to go. But it seems nothing could be further from the truth. So, to get started, is a mouse and a joystick ok for X Plane? If MSFS runs ok on medium to medium/high settings regarding graphics, FPS and such, would XP12 with say this A340 or the CL650 be likely to run similarly well? I'd appreciate any feedback from anyone on here. Thanks.

Maybe a bit, if it relates to flying objects with weird flight dynamics. Now summertime, spending a bit of time lounging about outdoors gazing at the sky, cloud formations and such. I'll keep my eyes peeled for anything unusual out there.

I could have sworn PMDG had lav trucks in their ground services, but certainly still lots of room for improvement. Maybe protestors gluing themselves to runways like in Germany recently. Or angry farmers setting off baloons, like I think has happened at Narita.

Ouch! It hurts to watch. Such a beautiful plane. I'll land like that in the sim quite a bit when my approach is horrible and I think no matter what I gotta land. Go arounds in the sim are so boring, but better safe than sorry in real life.

I'm very happy with World of AI. Ha! In FSX though, even though I'm permanently stuck in circa 2010. But I tried boosting the FSLTL IFR traffic level to 175 in MSFS today and did two short hops MUC-FRA-LHR. Yeahhh pretty darned ok, got quite a bit of traffic lining up for takeoffs, and fun to watch a few landings too while waiting. I've always enjoyed planespotting during longer waits for departure and the building anticipation as it gets closer to being your turn.

Very very very cool! Great video.

Do you mean the alt+l light? I thought it was a flashlight, but it's saved me a couple of times, using it to find the light switches I forgot to turn on before it got dark. But I never got any aural warning in connection with turning that light on or off. It worked fine for me. Sure are a lot of strange things going on in this sim. Sorry, no clue other than switching the computer sound off temporarily, as I still haven't seen a simple sim sound on/off switch like the q key. Nor for that matter a simple pause function like p, not some fancy pause, just a simple pause that pauses everything.

Personally I've sometimes just done the lazy thing, watching some Youtube videos (startup guide for such and such an aircraft) and jotted down a checklist for myself according to that. There's nothing necessarily wrong with it as individual operators can work out their own checklists that could possibly deviate somewhat from manufacturer publications, i.e. they get their local CAA approval. Most of those YT videos I've seen seem pretty goood actually. Otherwise some payware aircraft like PMDG come with detailed manuals including checklists. Or just browsing the internet until one finds a specific aircraft one is looking for, but I can't remember now having seen any single source that includes checklists for many different aircraft.

Wait, what about giraffes, zebras, elephants? I vaguely remember them on the CD ROM cover for some flight sim a while back. I wonder how many old school floppy disks we would need to install this thing. I want to see ants crawling on blades of grass, gnats, flies, mosquitos that pop out of the screen and actually bite you. No limits as to what these new sims might offer.

I'm expecting highly detailed gradually changing fall colors, like different parts of New England from September to December based on location and elevation. I'm expecting extreme detail on final approach into an airport like LAX at night. The parking lots of supermarkets and convenience stores, cars pulling in and out of their spaces, crisp and clear flashing lights from police cars, fire engines, ambulances etc. On the other hand when Pong was released in 1972 it must have been exciting as well. Not only do you hit the ball with your little paddle, you can even hit the ball in different ways, like you're putting a spin on it, just like in real life! So I'm excited about FS24, just not that amazingly excited. I'm not expecting huge improvements over FS20, or P3D, or even FSX etc. To me it seems none of these has ever represented anything resembling a "great leap forward", but rather an overall steady progression, gradually improving quality, but also sometimes messing things up along the way. Which I feel is perfectly normal.

For a little while the past couple of years I was listening to a bit of Namewee (Malaysian artist), (Hello Hater and Fragile). But actually hard for me to listen to pretty much any music anymore, I get annoyed and bored too easily, not sure why. But I used to love Iron Maiden! I thought of getting the PMDG DC-6 and listening to some 50s tunes. I got the AS DC-8 and was fascinated by the Vietnam War and hippie era for a little while, and listened to some 60s Beach Boys tunes for a bit while flying from SFO to Saigon, island hopping across the Pacific.

Right now I see it simply as a platform for my fourth payware aircraft, the 737-700. My other planes 747, 777, and DC8 are still on FSX:SE. I enjoy all four, and still switch back and forth between them. The ones on FSX still feel better to me (totally subjective, just my touchy feely sensation). And in MSFS everything looks way better, way way way better, even on medium settings, no question. The touchy feely differences do seem to be dwindling, meaning to me MSFS doesn't seem too far behind in terms of handling sensation. I'm using it more and more. But since FSX, its associated aircraft, plus Active Sky don't take up a huge amount of space, I still find them valuable to keep. Overall MSFS means to me a good sim, well worth the money, I'm glad I got it, just with some nuisances that make me not like it that much more than other flight sims I've owned.

I'd say PC flight sims for pilots practicing IFR techniques are roughly the equivalent of wooden dummies for martial artists like Ip Man. I don't think so much has changed since the 1980s, no need to even bother with clouds, just set your sim visibility down to like 1/4 mile, try out different wind settings, try out different scenarios partial panel etc. I think Flight Simulator 2.0 is more or less as good as FS 2024 will be in this respect, but we'll see when it comes out. I've been enjoying FS 2020 more and more recently. Having fun, and it really looks great. And I'm looking forward to seeing more videos of FS 2024 as they come out, and then at some point decide when it becomes worth buying. My hunch is most people on here can drive a car. If I had a driving sim modeling some standard car like a Ford Focus, I'd mainly be interested in how closely my movements, turning the wheel, stepping on the gas, applying brake pressure etc. would translate compared to the equivalent movements in real life. Then conditions like steep hills or slippery icy surfaces would be of interest, graphics would have a bit lower priority. I'd never expect the driving sim to 100% resemble real life, but of course I'd want to get as close as possible. My main wish for FS2024 would be a wave of euphoria from real world pilots saying "Wow! I must admit, this really does feel even much closer to the real thing than I've experienced in any previous sim."

Like Ravi Shankar? Just kidding... I was also wondering about the pilot reports, or whether there have been sightings by airline passengers. I certainly would like to believe they're already here, whoever they are.

It's how I felt too around New Year's when I started MSFS coming from FSX. I also wish for Active Sky or something similar. But I think for being included in the program, the live weather in MSFS is pretty good. I personally don't mind setting a daytime flight with nighttime live weather for such and such a location, as long as the conditions are somewhat believable. What would interest me most is how the 737 feels in FSX vs MSFS. I know MSFS looks better, but does it feel better? I'm still a bit sceptical bouncing around in the 737 on an uneven runway. I still don't buy that MSFS has better flight dynamics, physics etc. compared to P3D or FSX.

I wish instead of this one is completely study level, but this one isn't at all study level, there were some sort of rating system. i.e. the top models get an A+ or 98% rating, or something similar. A low to medium level plane like the JustFlight 757 Freemium might still get a C- or 68% study level rating. Not an all or nothing type thing. Obviously such a rating system would be only opinions, only a very rough indicator. I've only tried the PMDG BBJ and the default A310 for longhauls in MSFS. I'd give the BBJ 85% and the 310 75% study level scores. Just a totally wild guess though.