!! Windows 7 no longer supported !!

As Microsoft will stop supporting Windows 7 on Jan 20th we will be unable to test any of our
products on that platform. It may work, or it may not, but no guarantees from our side. 

Jump to content

PatrickZ

members
  • Content Count

    1598
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by PatrickZ

  1. Pretty useless writing to Jo Erlend Sund since Torp is not one of his products. It was done by Joakim Tychesen, you should write to him. Jo Erlend has nothing to do with it and can therefor not give permission.
  2. Early February I'll be visiting Bari. I'll see if I can take some pictures, but no guarantee of course. I'm just a passenger, so I'm very limited in what I can do. Also my arrival at the airport will be late in the evening, it'll be dark by then. Not exactly the best conditions for taking pictures. Departure will be during the day.
  3. I fully understand where this is coming from, I too would like to see the new features to be utilized. However this takes time. Don't worry, I totally accept that, but a straight import might make the difference between something and nothing at all. It could be a temporary solution to have at least something to use while we wait for the final product with the new features. That is of course, if a straight import is possible. That's not always the case and if it's not possible, then the whole discussion is irrelevant. Don't waste too much energy on it, that ain't worth it. However if it's a simple thing, why wouldn't you do it? As long as it's clear that it's a temporary version and not the final product, the lack of implementation of the new features won't be an issue.
  4. Is this what you were looking for? https://secure.simmarket.com/bridge-beijing-daxing-intl-airport_p3d.phtml
  5. I agree, it looks like polished metal instead of concrete. Better remove the PBR from it.
  6. And as far as I know FSDG is in the process of making the Maldives, or at least the major airport Male. Not sure about the rest of the islands.
  7. I agree this would be a very convenient filter. I exclusively use P3D v4 and I'm not interested in X-Plane products. It bothers me when they show up, it makes seaching more difficult. One time I have even accidentally added the wrong product to my shopping cart (or rather the right product but for the wrong platform), but luckily I noticed by mistake in time and was able to remove it.
  8. There was a rumor ORBX would do it, but so far I can't find any source for it. So do I, however there might be a possibility for LatinVFR to do it. No promise though, but he does live in Orlando and is planning to do Orlando International. Maybe he'll make the project a bit broader and include Sanford as well.
  9. I had a few doubts when answering question number 4. I am in favor of closing the questions once an answer is provided, however I can also understand that sometimes this answer is insufficient and leads to further questions. In that case the topic is better left open. As a compromise I propose to implement a "delayed closure". Let's say after an answer has been provided, the topic stays open for 3 more days. If no replies have been given in the topic during those 3 days, the topic is being closed. Otherwise it stays open.
  10. I don't know if you noticed, but you're posting French in an English forum. Many people here (including me) don't speak French and therefor don't have a clue what you're saying. I've put your post in Google Translate and it looks like a support question. That cannot be answered here. In the title of the forum it clearly says no support. The French support forums are over here: https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/774-support-simulation-de-vol-fsx-p3d-fs9-xp10/
  11. True, but technically it ain't the same sim. It's a whole new development. They sold the licenses for their old Flight Simulator program. The professional license went to Lockheed Martin who turned it into P3D. The entertainment license went to Dovetail which first became FSX Steam Edition and later Flight Sim World. With both licenses no longer in the hands of Microsoft, they cannot base it on the existing FSX-based sims. With Dovetail no longer developing any continuation of their product after Flight Sim World, it is currently only Lockheed Martin that is still active in the continuation of the original Flight Simulator series that were once started by Microsoft.
  12. I don't think so. Sure, MS Flight Simulator will be popular, I don't doubt that. But I've said it before and I'm saying it again: the key to success in the Flight Sim world isn't quality. It's compatibility. It doesn't matter how beautiful the new MS Flight Simulator will look, if the current add-ons aren't available for it that will prevent people from switching. People have invested a whole lot of money in their current sims and they ain't likely to give that up for a new sim on which all of their valuable add-ons don't work. They will stick to what they have, even if it's of lower quality. For obvious reasons flight simmers are very conservative in their choice of platform. Looking at myself, I am watching the development of MS Flight Simulator but I sure won't be the first to try it, let alone switch to it. I'll wait for the add-ons to become available before I even consider trying it. That might easily take a couple of years. And who knows, when P3D v5 comes around it might make all of MS Flight Simulator redundant like it did with Dovetail Flight Sim World. That wasn't a bad sim either, but still didn't make it because P3D already had the market. There's no guarantee MS Flight Simulator will make it.
  13. I guess this answers my question if Aerosoft would be the publisher of this scenery: Pictures are looking good though! So far all that was known was "it's being worked on". Now we got something to look at.
  14. He probably meant that you can use them on that existing old desktop computer instead of on a laptop. However that still wouldn't fix the problem as mostly these external graphics adapters are hardly better (sometimes even worse) than the on-board graphics card that is already in the motherboard. For a good one you pay good money, more than you would for a regular internal graphics card. Besides, you're always limited by the speed of the USB-port. A system that old probably doesn't have USB 3.0, you'd have USB 2.0 at most. And that ain't fast enough for graphics. I would go for a desktop PC if I were you. As others have said, there are gaming laptops under $ 1000 however you get more value for money if you go for a desktop. Besides it gives you more flexibility as it's easier to tweak desktops than laptops. I wouldn't go for a pre-built ready-to-go desktop system, unless you're lucky they always have something that is not quite it. However desktops are easy to custom-build, you can just order a pile of parts and assemble it yourself. It's not that difficult, and that way you have complete control over every single part. And it's not much more expensive than buying a pre-built system, sometimes even cheaper depending on what hardware you choose. The best desktop systems are always the custom-built ones.
  15. Integrated graphics are indeed the problem. They're good enough for some simple office work or maybe watching a movie, but not for anything heavy like gaming or flight sim. On short term a new graphics card would help, however I wouldn't spend too much money on it as this computer isn't worth it anymore. Instead I would start saving up for a new computer. If you're thinking about add-ons like ORBX Global Base, forget it. Even without knowing the further specifications like motherboard or HDD, I can already tell you this computer isn't powerful enough for that. It has an outdated CPU, little memory and an on-board video card with shared memory. Obviously, it was designed for budget instead of power. What you're currently trying to do is just barely meeting the minimum requirements. That means it'll run, but that's all that can be said about it. It won't be smooth and it won't have any room for additional extras. You were mentioning ORBX, then keep in mind that you should add up the requirements for that and for the Aerosoft Airbus to run them together. That means you'll need a computer that's a whole lot more powerful than what you have now.
  16. As for electrical systems, there is always the possibility to lower the RAM Air turbine and thus generate some emergency power. That should allow you to operate the radios and other essential electrical systems. By the way, I remember years ago there was a TU-154 somewhere over Russia that had lost all electrical systems. This included the fuel pumps as well, meaning that within 10 minutes the engines would run dry and shut down. In other words, they had 10 minutes to land the aircraft whilst having a total instrument black-out. The fact that they lost the radio was the least of their problems as they also lost the altitude and speed indicators. All they could do was descend and hope for the best. Once on low altitude with ground visibility, the pilot spotted a runway from the corner of his eye and went for it. It was overgrown with bushes as the small airport, which was never designed to handle something as big as a TU-154, had closed down decades ago. They managed to land just in time and even though the aircraft was severely damaged everybody made it out alive.
  17. I've just read that Tailstrike Designs, the developer of Aerosoft Bergamo Professional, is now working on Bari. There is no preview thread on the Aerosoft forums yet, however I do assume Aerosoft will be the publisher. Any info on that?
  18. It is indeed the same scenery, Simware is fully owned by Aerosoft. The preview for the X-Plane version of this scenery is here: In the meanwhile, this is the P3D preview thread for Geneva.
  19. I do hope that static Wizzair plane can be disabled in the final scenery, I hate static aircraft. This would also mean you have to include two AFCAD files, one where the parking spot occupied by the Wizzair plane is disabled and the aircraft is in place and one where it is enabled and the static aircraft is not there.
  20. Looking good! If it's good enough to publish through Aerosoft (if that's your goal), I can't decide. Only Aerosoft can do that. However if you ask my opinion, I'd say it needs more work on the ground textures. For example if you look at the last screenshot it's just a grey area with a few objects on them, but no details. I got the impression that your ground textures are hand-drawn. Nothing wrong with that, but it'll never be as detailed as photoreal. Nevertheless, keep up the good work! I'm looking forward to this scenery when it'll be finished.
  21. I already knew. Downside is of course that even though the simulator is in your hotel room, you're not free to use it as you please. Only as a session with an instructor present, for which they charge even more than for the room itself. I got the feeling most of us would do just fine without the instructor, but that's not allowed. For me, it ain't worth it. There's nothing in that room that I can't do at home for free.
  22. Both are good, however entirely different. In real life too, they just can't be compared. What plane you like to fly is entirely your personal preference, are you more of a Boeing or an Airbus guy? If you can fly one, you know nothing about the other. There's a different logic behind them. What planes have you flown so far? What's your experience?
×
×
  • Create New...