Jump to content

Herman

Deputy Sheriffs
  • Posts

    4359
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by Herman

  1. I have no problems with the trains in Innsbruck X at all. They do start and stop at the edge of the scenery, but that should be expected behavior. I've hovered at the end of the line to wait for one and chased it all the way across the scenery too. They start every couple of minutes. Great fun. There's even little sparks above the loco as the catenary brushes a hanger bracket! Also, with "Road Vehicles" at 25%, there's a realistic amount of traffic on the highways and streets. The whole scenery is a real treat and everything I was led to expect. I do agree with the earlier posters who wished for just a couple of static aircraft...as long as the frame rates stay up. The designers chose well if there is a serious trade-off between aircraft and FPS though. System: Win7 64Bit, 8800GTX 768 MB, i7 920 o'clocked to 4.0 GHz, 6 GB RAM
  2. Er, I don't think you can buy it in anyone's website right now. Maybe you're seeing a pre-order option. It hasn't been released for FSX, period. The FS9 version has been out for a while and it has us itching to get our hands on the FSX version.
  3. I agree with the previous poster. Mathijs, your statement is an excellent summary of why I continue to support Aerosoft products, and also why these forums are so valuable. You've made your case, with real world data, to refute those with only anectodal stories on their side. You also shared how a decision you made at one point in the development cycle was overcome by reality, so you changed it. A willingness to discard a public position in the face of facts is hard to do but also the right thing to do too. I just hope this topic doesn't degrade into folks who want to argue with what is, after all, Aerosoft's decision to make. Your vote is based on facts; our vote will be in whether we buy a well designed, "as real as it gets" product that's true to the design goals. When this project was first announced, I was not interested in an Airbus of any quality. As things have evolved, and you've patiently described your design goals, I am now looking forward to your 'bus and will buy it. That's my vote. Finally, thanks for this unusual livery. We don't see it here in the States, but I've seen it in the previews for InnsbruckX and loved it.
  4. If by "solid" you mean they have zero deflection under normal operations, I disagree, based on personal experience as a UH-1H crew chief in Viet Nam. From my vantage point in the "well" (alongside the transmission facing out and behind an M-60), there was visible outwards latereal motion as the weight of the helo was transfered from the rotor disk to the skids. Granted, that flex was all in the cross tubes, but the point is that the skids as a whole assembly were not completely rigid. Another way you could see it was when we'd hoist the entire helo with a 5 ton wrecker (big tow truck) to perform maintenance on the cross tubes, saddle straps (what holds the cross tubes in place) or replace a bent skid. I no longer remember the difference between dimentions with the ship suspended and when the full weight was on the skids, but it was easily measurable. Indeed, the maintenance manual (US Army TM 55-1520-210-20 - the organizational maintenance manual) contained skid-to-skid maximum dimention limitations to acount for hard landings and the resultant permanant deformation of the cross tubes. That said, I honestly can't see a reason to program this motion into the sim. I'm simply trying to point out that the landing gear (after all, that's what it is) is not a perfectly rigid structure. As an aside, while I no longer have my -20 maintenance manual handy, I still have a vintage (May 1969) TM 55-1520-210-10 Operator's Manual for the UH-1H. I assume you have access to one considering the masterful modeling you've done, but if a loan of several months would be of use (check lists, color performance charts, etc), just PM me and I'd be happy to get it into your hands. I'm really looking forward to flying an old friend.
  5. To install and set up the controls, just carefully follow the instructions that should have come with them. The manufacturer's website is a big help if you lost the instructions or need newer drivers. Assigning functions is done within FS or you can use a utility provided by the manufacturer. I suggest doing it within FS, so if you have issues, you won't have to guess if it's caused by FS or the utility. Once you gain experience, use the utility if you wish. The "Differential Brakes" message means you're applying unequal pressure to the brake pedals (accidently or on purpose). As a previous reply noted, you can intentially use differential brakes to tighten a turn while also slowing down. In your case, I believe you're wondering why the message appeared when you had never seen it before. The likely answer is you were accidentally "dragging" a brake while taxiing. Learning to keep your toes off the brakes takes some getting used to but I assure you student pilots in real aircraft have the same issue. If it's in flight, you're again dragging a brake (no big deal, but the message is annoying) OR your brakes are out of calibration. Or both. In any event, treat yourself by downloading and buying (registering) a copy of Pete Dawson's "FSUIPC" and you'll be able to properly calibrate your new control setup. After you do, you'll re-wonder all over again why you didn't do this a long time ago.
  6. A Merry Christmas to all who hang out on this forum. And a special seasonal thanks to Shaun and Mathijs for your superb work as moderators.
  7. Oliver, You consistently use "trail" when I believe you mean "trial". The difference to someone that doesn't notice that English probably isn't your first language may confuse them. They may well think you're talking about a "path" instead of a "sample". Please consider this a helpful comment and not a condemnation of your English skills, which far surpass my skills in German. It's meant only to help those who may misunderstand your comment and not receive the value you intend.
  8. Aerosoft's "Scenery German 1" has a nice EDFM. I have the boxed set, but it's also on the download. See http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/us/iboshop.cgi?showd70!40,5363863080,DFS01909
  9. Orders generally stay on your account for at least a year. I have items going back to June of 2008. You should be able to simply log into your account and find your files ready for download. You'll also find the key you'll need to install it. This kind of capability is one of many reasons why I like doing business with Aerosoft. You'll find a link to your account on the left side pane of the Aerosoft home page It's just above the "Rise of Flight" banner. By the way, once you download the files, do not forget to make a copy (or two) to CD or DVD. If you had done so last time, you'd already be flying. And once the order finally goes away, it's a whole lot harder to get it back.
  10. So is the stub of the old east runway.
  11. You apparently missed the screenshots shown on the right side of each product page. For example, for Austria Professionial for 2004, there are four small thumbnail views. Click on the "Screenshots >>" ribbon under the bottom thumbnail to get 26 much larger views. I just looked, they're there.
  12. I know it's truly just eye candy, but the "T" road intersection with the traffic signal just outside the 26L approach lights is a treat to watch while in a hover. Brake lights on the vehicles are displayed when they come to a stop and the synchonization between the traffic signal and the traffic in the different lanes is a nifty piece of code. My hat is off to whomever took the time to work that into a delightfully done airport.
  13. I don't have the Acceleration pack, just the standard FSX Deluxe with SP1 and 2. I don't have this mission either, so perhaps it's avaiable only with the Acceleration pack or maybe the Gold Version.
  14. You get what you pay for and Aerosoft was always upfront with the price point vs. the limitations. I think the scenery is fair value as summer-day for the relatively low price. I might be willing to pay a little more for night textures, but since most of my flying is daytime, I wouldn't pay twice the price even for twice the textures. As for seasons, they're not nearly different enough in San Francisco to make be pay anything extra. I flew in the bay area as a flight instructor and charter pilot at FBO's from Santa Rosa to Monterey from 1974 to 1986, so I know the place very well. The seasons were marked by weather changes far, far more than vegitation changes (except in the wine country). Since the scenery is the built up areas, seasonal textures don't make much sense at all in this particular location. In any other metro area, I just don't see the value either.
  15. That explains it. Thanks for the reply.
  16. With a title like "Approaching Innsbruck," does this mean that there are missions with extra challenging weather, or is it simply in referrence to the lead-in lights and that you get more than just the immediate airport? Just wondering. This one's been on my list since I first saw it on Upcoming Products
  17. I suspect the castle at least is part of German Landmarks. I think this is the case because I recently reinstalled my scenery when I moved it to a dedicated drive. I installed GL first and the castle was there. I later installed VFR Germany West and the castle was gone. This was because I chose to disable GL landmarks and use those of VFRG. When I reversed this, the castle reappeared. I'll have to go flying and check for the horseman. Or maybe that's him at the Eck. Here's how this looks with German Landmarks and VFR Germany...
  18. Rainer, besides what's already shaping up to be another fabulous add-on airport, how far out from the airport will the enhanced scenery extend? I was wondering when I saw the reference to "City of Bremen from Aerosoft Scenery," so I assume you're refering to the FS9 add-on. Please correct this if wrong. Looking forward to Bremen, along with all the others.
  19. Herman

    Do27 X

    Note that in section 1.9 of the manual ("Configuration in Flight Simulator") under 4. ("Prop Pitch") that in "Realistic" mode, "If you use a hardware controller for operating the propeller pitch, it won't work. In this case, you have to switch to... Simple:" where your joystick should work.
  20. If these thoughts have already been noted, I'm voting for them. Getting through six pages of posts means I might have missed an earlier great idea. If not, please add them to "the pile": Changing Settings "On the Fly" Many of the ideas about "imersion" such as rattles and squeeks, damage when ignoring limitations and dirty aircraft effects (throwing oil during flight) are already possible. The Do27 is a brilliant example. You can fly it simple or real. Not being a dev, though, I don't know how hard this is to code. Simplifying this in the SDK to encourage more devs to do this would be a benefit. However, something noted early on about changing things "on the fly" without having to reload the aircraft have real merit. For example, trading down shadow effects for frame rate when approaching a complex area that sends the frame rates to a slide show, and then moving them back up when you're past the complex scenery, is my vote. ATC I'd love to see the ability to chose between something like VatSim and me controlling ATC. As for biggest ATC gripes, manually selecting the SID/STAR/DP and especially the approach in use is vital for me. I hate having to play with the winds and other factors, that sometimes require knowing the preferred runway model is annoying at least. The ability to select the items noted on a pick list would be one way to do this. Physics I second the thought about this in post 171. Flight Planner I heartily second the thought about this in post 173. Nav Data The thoughts about integrating a data feed such as from Navigraph are excellent! The Base Product Finally, a thought about how detailed the product should be "out of the box." I've seen earlier comments about whether there should be 10 or 20 highly detailed aiports or cities in the sim or the alternative of an almost all inclusive highly detailed sim. My thought there is that individual highly detailed airports are what add-on developers like Aerosoft are all about. I'm perfectly willing to pay extra for a high quality add-on, just as we do now. And speaking of cost, for something like you described in post 1, I'd be willing to pay 2x or perhaps even 3x the cost of FSX. After all it's faults and warts, it's still excellent value for the price.
  21. Herman

    Vfr Charts

    Perhaps the reference is to the airdrome charts such as are included in the German Airfields series.
  22. Looks like all of us who had our credit cards ready are in for a treat. It's available now!
  23. Your experience is similar to mine in what it takes to keep the Do flying. I understand this is similar to what needs to be done with other complex aircraft (as noted somewhere on the Digital Aviation website), so it's not just a Do issue. As long as I start with a default aircraft at a default airport, THEN once the default setup loads, change to the Do and wherever I want to start, things work just great. Trying to start with the Do results in a CTD before long, at least for me, using Vista64 and FSX. The extra steps to keep the Do happy are worth it to me, for the challenge and utility of the aircraft.
  24. It works just fine. I'm running Vista64 SP1, FS9 SP1 and AES 1.99b. To get AES to work with FS9 in Vista, I think you have to have at least AES open "As Administrator."
×
×
  • Create New...