Herman

Deputy Sheriffs
  • Content count

    1959
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Herman last won the day on October 6 2012

Herman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

601 Excellent

About Herman

  • Rank
    Deputy Sheriff

Recent Profile Visitors

28267 profile views
  1. Perhaps you saw Mathijs' request for input on a potential update for the Twin Otter Extended here. Your input would be welcome.
  2. For 2, I don't remember from the beta why it's that way, but it's far from the only add-on with that behavior. If that's disappointing to you, that's your call. For 4, Emi's comment is the response, and I'm in agreement with you on that one. There was a solid reason for not hiding it that came up during the beta, I just don't remember what it was. For 5, I hope you see the two earlier points and mine as well. If not, I for one would not call that a "disappointment" but rather an invalid transfer of what works in little airplanes to bigger ones. Especially in a turboprop, you don't need to forward slip to lose altitude in a hurry; those props at flight idle work better than anything short of flight spoilers. Even in a King Air C-90 (less than 10,000 pounds, compared to 12,500 for the -6), I wouldn't use a side slip for a crosswind landing but rather a crab. Pax don't like slips, and it's another reason why you don't do them in something that size. For 6, sounds are entirely subjective, and subject as well to how good your speakers/headset/headphones are. Those of us on the beta team with time in the real aircraft agreed the soundset was more than satisfactory. For 7, it's been a while since I had mine installed, so I'll have to see if it works or not. Which version of the sim are you referring to? if P3D 4v, there's lots of issues with lighting that are sim based, not add-on based. But I'll look. So I think this is a bottom line: the product doesn't meet your expectation of what the Twin Otter is like, although experienced pilots worked to ensure it is a reasonable representation of the aircraft, especially for the money. Your disappointment is based on some points that are entirely subjective, some that turned out to not be entirely valid, some that were design compromises you disagree with, and some created by YT videos which very very rarely truly represent real life, or even the sim. Your shared your customer assessment, some of us associated with Aerosoft shared ours, and now other potential customers can balance your opinion with those other opinions. Probably a good place to leave this.
  3. It hasn't been released yet by PMDG. Once it is, PMDG has to send the files to Aerosoft, who had to run a quality control check (it's happened recently where a vendor supplied update was rushed into distribution and had to be recalled when problems arose). Aerosoft can usually post them to your account within a day or so after they receive them. Do keep in mind that dates can slip and there are no guarantees...as you saw with this add-on. You can check the official PMDG forum here for release info. While it looks like this is dated May 30, it's updated as needed by PMDG.
  4. I think it's a great option. I think the biggest challenge will be helping customers see that the small upgrade (not update) price is simply a continuation of Aerosoft's practice of only charging of new software bits. For additional features that could bring in other customers besides the connected cockpit and DL fans, nothing comes quickly to mind. I'll take a look at the support topic and see if there's some consistent user request that could add value at a hopefully small price. A -400 option is sometimes requested, but I don't know enough about that series to know what it would take to upgrade the 100/300 we have now.
  5. Branech, I was one of the beta test team members for the Twin Otter. My background includes over 6,000 hours IRL from Cessna150s to the Gulfstream II and III. It also includes 30 years as an FAA inspector (now retired) where in the late 80s, I was the principal operations inspector (POI) for a scheduled operator with a Twin Otter on floats in the Pacific Northwest. As their POI, I checked out all their check airmen in flight, since there was no sim available to the operator. I can assure you the Aerosoft Twin Otter flies, sounds, and behaves very closely to the real thing including instrument indications. I have substantial time on PT-6 engine aircraft and the engine behavior in the Twin Otter is as close as you're going to get with the limitations of FSX relative to the price point of the product. We spent extensive time tweaking the start sequence and in-and-out of beta to get it as close as it is. Finally, with regard to slips in an aircraft of that size and configuration, I completely agree with what was written by Emi and Mathijs on slipping large aircraft. There's nothing to add to what they wrote except to point out that it's one reason why you use the crab method instead of the side-slip method for crosswind landings in pretty much anything over 10,000 pounds or so. With all due respect, I invite you to share your relevant pilot experience in the Twin Otter with that of the beta testers to help us see why you think we didn't get it quite right.
  6. Thanks for sharing your fix, Nick. Because we believe this topic has been answered we have closed it. If you have any more questions feel free to open a new topic.
  7. I'm sure you won't need to rebuy them. This developer so far has followed the lead of virtually all other developers in providing free updates to a P3D V3 product to work with v4. It just takes some time. It is an additional cost to them to modify a product that worked with the version of P3D that was current when the add-on was released, so their resource priorities may not be yours, but it will get done.
  8. That seems to be an FSDG decision that others dislike, as seen in your comment and the reply to it towards the end of the string in this link.
  9. Someone on Aerosoft staff then will have to comment on your question, hkterry.
  10. Because we believe this topic has been answered we have closed it. If you have any more questions feel free to open a new topic.
  11. I'm not clear now on the issue. I don't have the scenery, so I can't independently test for your concerns. Does the new installer update only two of the four airports? What indications are you seeing that Djerba and Sharm El Sheikh are not P3D v4 compatible? All, Aerosoft is dependent on the developer for any update files, so they can only make available what was sent to them by the devs. If you follow any of the other add-ons where there are delays or late files provided to Aerosoft, you'll see this isn't limited to the Holiday Airports 2 software.
  12. hkterry, do keep in mind that Aerosoft is not the developer. They're dependent on the dev for future support, including any updates to support sims that didn't exist when the scenery was released.
  13. Is each airport in the collection on a separate installer? According to the expanded Compatibility list here, neither LGIR, LGTS, nor the Holiday Airports 2 are supported yet. There's every reason to think they will be and soon. If you found a reliable source that LGIR and LGTS from the Holiday Airports Collection are in fact P3D v4 compatible, I'd appreciate your replying with a link so the information can be shared.
  14. That's a different question. Aerosoft is currently reviewing all its 200+ projects regarding P3Dv4 compatibility and what needs to be done. To know what is coming up in the future, simply subscribe to the Compatibility List topic to get informed when there are any new announcements.
  15. As with any other add-on, your can try the following methods and hope the scenery works. Just copy over an installation from another sim and add it to v4 via the Scenery Library, or see if the installer will work with v4. There's also the ".xml" approach for the strong of stomach, as described in forums such as this one on Avsim . Just do a search in the linked forum for ".xml" (the text including the dot inside the quotes") and you'll see how it works. If and until it's stated on the Aerosoft Compatibility page as ready for P3D V4, if "successful," there are no guarantees it will work, and any issues won't receive support.