Thralni
-
Posts
358 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Thralni
-
-
Standing by for tomorrow then!
-
Thanks for the update! This is gonna be soooo much fun
-
Looks beautiful, to say the least.
-
I think this will be a sub 20 Euro product.
Right, that's it, I'll buy it. Sub 20 Euro for a Russian airport with nice connections to surrounding airports is a chance I can't miss. There's even a direct flight to Tel Aviv!
-
Oh my flippin' god, wow! Never, ever, expected this. I'll probably buy it, even if it ends up just being a way to give support to the developer. We need much more Russian sceneries and therefor I'm glad to hear the market there is expanding. I personally don't really like the South European, or other of those very warm beach destinations, for reasons even I am not quite sure of. The only exception to this is Tel Aviv, which is mainly due to nostalgia.
By the way, for those wanting a UUWW scenery, there is one available for FSX, by alfaFly: http://alfafly.com/f...ovo_mailin.html I have it myself and it's pretty nice, beats any other scenery for it anyway.
-
That's true of course, chris. You've got people around that try get FSX running on an Apple II and then blame the developers for the bad performance they have...
-
I don't think it's particularly fair to say that Aerosoft's products don't perform well.
[...]
Chris
Which is why I said plenty products don't perform particularly well, as opposed to all Aerosoft products in general, plenty being a very subjective term! As a matter of fact, I can think of a good number that work quite well, such as Madrid Barajas, Budapest Ferihegy, Paris Charles de Gaulle and just about all German airports. To say that my hardware thus must not be good enough though, when the situation is clear that many people experience the performance problems in the earlier mentioned sceneries, even making these sceneries notorious for their low performance, doesn't make sense to me. Aerosoft is up there with the best scenery designers and they only release very highly detailed sceneries. Some of the sceneries are both highly detailed and perform very well, such as many of the German airports (all of which are very good). Also products by Simwings tend to be very well detailed and perform well. For some sceneries this is simply not the case and they return lower FPS then they should be doing. No matter how good your system is, you will see that drop most probably, although it might not affect your flying that much as it affects other's flying.
There are solutions for this kind of thing, you know. OrbX and UK2000 use it all the time, as does FlyTampa. It's called scalability. You provide the user with a small interface, in which he can choose specific parts of the scenery to be displayed or not. Thus the user can "custom taylor" the scenery to his visual and performance needs. It works great and it would be nice if Aerosoft included such tools in their more detailed sceneries also. I mean, having lots of 3D cars is nice, but not if they provide unnecessary FPS loss. At least with OrbX you can disable them.
kaspis: I hope you are not implying that I only complain about the badness of Aerosoft sceneries, because I rarely do that. Heck, have you read the many reviews I wrote for Avsim about Aerosoft sceneries? For as far as I can remember, I have only written positive reviews!
Concluding, I'm not saying Aerosoft sceneries are bad. I'm saying that there are sceneries that perform less well than they probably should, when comparing them to other sceneries of similar complexity. That's all I'm saying, honestly...
-
The trackrecord of Aerosoft regarding performance really isn't that good. Plenty of sceneries (EBBR, LFPO, EHAM, etc) come to mind that simply don't have very good performance. The sceneries often look very ncie, but they all come at a cost. I'm a bit shocked to hear that performance isn't such a greta concerne to Mathijs, though. Sure, in marketing its important that the scenery looks good, but if we end up with a scenery looks good but runs bad, then all you'll get is the forum running over with complaints. That's also not good for marketing, is it now?
That said, I'll most probably buy Stavanger. I love flying around Scandinavia, and I tend to get every airport that's available in that area. If there are some good connections with other airport, of course.
-
okay, but it is still earlier than the pmdg NGX
No, I'm very sure that won't be the case. For as far as I know, the PMDG 737NGX could get into wide beta testing any day now (which means a release isn't too far off), and the Advanced Aerosoft Airbus's systems are still in rather early development stages, what with the rewritten FBW (meaning we still have a long wait).
-
Sounds all good to me! I've become very conservative on what to install and what not, but I think this will see the inner side of my FSX folder
-
Looks really great! It'll be nice to fly between Stockholm and Vilnius, and if I am in a Russian mood, do some hops between St. Petersburg and Vilnius.
-
Looks great!
-
But this is not the case for everyone as well, sure is strange.
Very weird. As it is, for me the Airbus remains parked. I hope the advanced version, with the reworked FBW, will handle correctly for me. I can only wait and see.
-
Sorry to resurrect this, but is shutting down the FBW really the only way? Just seems kind of silly, since the FBW is what makes an Airbus an Airbus.
By the way, FBW is going crazy during all phases of my flight, not just landing (the nosedive problem). Also during normal flight, it trims the plane like a maniac so that I constantly have to push and pull really hard on the stick to make it fly level. Really annoying. And, autoland goes bonkers. It captures LOC, but never aligns with it. It keeps adjusting its course, so that you fly in a kind of zig-zag way down to the runway. Never seen anything quite like it....
-
Looks good! Can't wait for september
-
Bit surprised... Looks very good, but wasn't a new Nice for FSX released only several months ago? Why suddenly a new one?
-
Love those screenshots! Keep 'em coming
-
Dag, any link to screenshots or announcement? Dying to see it :-)
As for Stavanger X, bring it on! I love flying around Scandinavia, this will only make it nicer.
-
Sounds good to me :-) I cna only hope Riga and tallinn will also get their Aerosoft make-over :-) It'd be fun doing EFHK-EVRA!
-
1
-
-
Yes for a product i have only made one 30min flight in
Put it this way im not purchasing the CRJ
That is completely unfair. The systems of the CRJ are made by Digital Aviation, not by Aerosoft. Aerosoft only makes the model for the CRJ. For the rest it was and still is a Digital Aviation production.
-
Good lord, remind me never to go to these places by plane, or install an (extra) lavatory...
-
This addon is stunning. I have been flying around Rekyavik with the PMDG J41. With full settings I still average 18 FPS at that location. I couldn't be happier! It's the perfect addon for me!
-
Air Iceland are now at the moment only using Fokker 50 and Dash 8-106 and mainly the Dash is used for Greenland flights, like from Reykjavik to Kulusuk and Nuuk but occasionally the Fokker50
is used for Greenland flights..
At the moment I think Norlandair are using all Air Iceland Twin Otters for flight from Akureyri to Grimsey and other places. Also Norlandair takes care of all scheduled flights to and from Vestmannaeyjar (BIVM) to Bakki (BIBA) except the first weekend of August when most of Icelanders go drunk at Vestmanna -Island Air Iceland has also scheduled flights between Reykjavik and the island
Yeah, I've been collecting screenshots for the two repaints. The Twotters are used by Norlandair, but also by Flugfélag íslands (if that's the name of an actual airline). Both of them still have the Air Iceland logo on the tail, however. Thanks for the extra info by the way! I'll be recreating some of those flights when I have the paints done. And it's nice to know what planes they use to fly to greenland. That's most likely how I will go there myself
Gosh, now I really wish PMDG would do that Dash-8 
-
You know, I actually think I'm going to purchase this. I want to fly props in FSX, and since I'll most probably be going to Iceland for at least a months next year, how about some looking around in FS :-)
I don't suppose the BN2 Islander and Twotter are used in that region?
EDIT: Well this is incredible. Both are used in Iceland. The Twotter by Air Iceland, and the BN2 by Flugfélag Vestmannaeyja. I'm gonna do a repaint for both of them! This will be sooo much fun
Now let's hope the price is as reasonable as FTX's region scenery packs prices.
Pmdg 747 vs Wilco airbus vol 2
in English
Posted
The MD-11 for sure is a more interesting plane to fly then the others, and the performance of the MD-11 is better then both the 747 and Airbus Vol 2. That said, the 747 still is a very good simulation and I was always flying it fanatically around the world. I'm starting to find it a bit boring, however. It's, all in all, really quite a simple plant to fly. The MD-80 series and MD-11 require a very different approach, which i think makes them more interesting. Certainly the Leonardo Maddog is one of the best simulations I know, and because the MD-80 (which it simulates) is basically a rather old aircraft, it doesn't have much of the automation you see in modern Boeings. The result is a much more interesting flight.
But, I realize you are asking for long haul aircraft. I think he MD-11 would then be a nicer plane, for the reasons I already stated: better performance and a more interesting plane. That said, I'm no fan of the MD-11 (can't say why, something about it just doesn't appeal to me), and sadly, the PMDG's MD-11 has some pretty significant flaws in the exterior model. Also, keep in mind that the MD-11 is hardly used for passenger aviation. Only KLM, Martinair and Finnair seem to be using it to that end, so you're only left with cargo aviation. If that's not what you want, I suggest going for the PMDG 747.