Hightower

Awesome! Thanks Just had a look at it in ADE and Im wondering for example how stand E36 and E50 work. They are marked as 16' and no airline codes. They are shared gates I take it but how would they be assigned with AI? Also no ACA codes unless I missed it. I can add them in I take it?

LOL I am calm. Does it seem like im angry? I would just like to "carry on" and fly in and out of LSZH like in V3. Didnt know asking about status of a project is a crime. Afterall there is a whole discussion threads on unreleased projects like the Bus updates.

Since the threads which ask about Mega LSZH keep getting closed, I have to open another thread. I know better then to ask for a release date, but wondering whats happening with the project since its been on the V4 list for quite a while and had a projected release time frame, but now its switched to TBD for the past month. Is it on hold? Big issues? Cant find any information from Pad Labs which I believe is the developer.

It was a problem. I havnt seen S turn problems in quite a while now. (2+ years?) All the major aircraft have no issue tracking the nav even with crosswinds, head or tail winds in AS16 or ASN. The course is compensated accordingly. That includes the AS buses. The CRJ just needs some fine tuning in order to allow this compensation. High accuracy of the nav waypoints shouldnt be a difficult thing. Probably a very elusive but simple bug that is messing it up.

Heres my observation for 1005c regarding the FMS tracking.... Its quite a bit better, but not entirely accurate like NAV tracking should be.. What im seeing, is that it has lag in anticipating turns and therefore gets off course then it starts to chase the FMS needle. Eventually it does get back on course but takes a while. If your flying with ATC, they may not be too happy if your off by a mile. Sounds picky but could end up in TFC conflict. Its getting there though. Just needs fine tuning. Hope that helps A little adendum. Seems the better accuracy was shortlived and tempermental. Its way off course now after doing fairly well other than the above anomalies of chasing FMS needle.

I downloaded the new installer this morning. It appears the DLL is 1 day different although version details, both say 1005. I'll try this one posted just above.

Im afraid I concur. The nav mode continues to be elusive in being accurate. Below is the screenshot. Im using 1.0.0.5 just installed. (P3DV4) Route was LEPA to LPMA. It seems to be that perhaps the wind component is not being considered by the autopilot as the wind in this case is from the starboard side @31kts. Another flight I did but didnt post was similar. DirTo did not fix it. Couldnt tell you more as it soon got an immediate CTD just over the Balearic Sea while adjusting the range. No minidump. Hans, cheers and virtual beer for you. Cant imagine the headache this causes in trying to solve these bugs under pressure. Lots of excitement on it to fly something new and challenging, and perhaps some are not as reasonable as they should be in demands, but no way can all these things just work out perfectly on a big release. I liken it to those damn medical prescriptions. Fixes one thing, and creates 10 other unwanted side effects.

A340s are generally under powered hear and read. Just scour the internet for all the jokes on them being snails and what not, particularly for climb rates. Some controllers have quite the opinion of them. I remember marshalling them in at YVR, and thinking the engines are like hair dryers stuck on the wings. Just seemed out of proportion relative to the size of the aircraft. But they do have quite the range though. 7900nm on the A346 and probably for its time they were fuel efficient. Today not so much. I get a kick out of all these aesthetics opinions of aircraft. If an aircraft is ugly as sin, but saves 30-40% fuel while going very long range and is comfortable inside, its probably going to sell well. What we think of its looks is irrelevant. The newer aircraft are having these new nose style designs (B78s, A35s, CSeries) must be for some sort of engineering reason other than looks. I like it, but it took awhile to grow. Am I allowed to put in a second hopeful vote for the E-Jets? Theres all kinds of Boeings, Airbus , and a few Bombardier aircraft to fly now that CRJ is here.

Would love that, but will never happen. PMDG would never sell their product under its condition being that its so old albeit extremely good simulation. They already having enough trouble compiling the NGX for 64bit saying that its very old as well. Well MD11 is that much older. My favorite aircraft but no matter how we look at it, the aircraft is dead unfortunately .

This seems to be a sort of voting thread, so I will hope for one of the Embraer jets. The old Feelthere ones are long in the tooth now but they were fun to fly and somewhat challenge to learn with a little bit different logic. The SSG in x-plane for E170 I use for now but would be great to see it in P3D.

It appears its a no go as theres been no comment from 2 weeks ago. Guess we have to switch to Navigraph to get it updated.

Sorry to bring back this old topic. Even though the thread advises "This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one." I decided against it to keep the history. Dont want to be nagging, but would like to know what is happening if anything with simbrief updating. I really dont understand why this is not supported when other countless addons are. If you run through the different threads of late, simbrief is mentioned quite a bit. I used to use PFPX but found updating to accurate aircraft profiles quite cumbersome. Simbrief is my goto flight planner yet the only way to update its AIRAC for some reason is thru Navigraph. As mentioned earlier, I have the full combo subscription of charts and navdata pro as im sure many others do, yet we are stuck in this predicament of non synced AIRAC data from the flight planner and current FMS data. Please push this thru to make it happen, otherwise a statement that says we will not pursue and support simbrief would be appreciated. Then I will have to make a switch when able. Ive sent a similar plea to simbrief for cooperation and support from Aerosoft. Seems like they are at odds for whatever reason.

There is quite a few who use simbrief. Live streamers often use it. Many others who dont wish to use the complexity of PFPX. Its rather good, and gets the job done. When I want more comprehensive and detailed flightplan I will use PFPX, but for a shorter run I will use simbrief.

Thats great to hear Mathijs. Would be nice to see some open dialogue happen to resolve this. Thank you!

I just had a talk with Simbrief. According to him, it seems Aerosoft has not expressed any interest in Simbrief. Not even any discussions. On the flip side, Navigraph has been eager to always facilitate what is needed to support them. In this case a simple access code to unlock it. Seems to me that it would equate to a good number of potential customers for navdata pro deciding Navigraph instead for that reason. I can tell you for sure that if I had been a little more astute in checking what navdata pro supports or lack thereof, I would have definitly gone to Navigraph again. I use PFPX too, but simbrief is a nice alternative and its quicker. Whoever at AS makes these decisions, I hope its reconsidered.