Jump to content

cpschulz

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About cpschulz

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

cpschulz's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In Rare

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. Thanks a lot for your warm reply. I will be patient until next update is out. AFC-bridge issue: Unfortunately changing the order in the exe.xml makes no difference. 10th/1000th issue - i am using the Bravo in P3D also and it works fine. Indeed I think Asobo is aware of some FSX legacy issues out of former times. LM was cutting some of them during the developing of P3D. I am hopefully Asobo will do the same for MSFS.
  2. Hello, some things for you to know about the Honeycomb controls: 1. The Honeycomb software installer kills every exe.xml before. A backup will be created - so far as good - and i just found out this strange behavior after my FSUIPC won´t start with the sim anymore. This is very annoying. 2. The AFC bridge module won´t autostart with the sim. It is totally equal which steps are made to solve the issue. For example: The FSUIPC starts with the sim, the AFC bridge does not altough both are entered in the same exe.xml file (and before you give me the answer, i have to check the right path etc. - i have triplecheck alle that things, that you provided to other users with same problem). Just a manual start makes the bridge come to life. 3. The 10th and 1000th steps issue is not solved yet. That is also an annoying thing with the Honeycomb controls. Sure, there are some tips to fix this with bindings per third party software, but it can not be the solution in my opinion. I expected a compatible product with MSFS and all the steps to do, to make the Honeycomb controls fit for MSFS takes hous of hours to show videos, to read forums etc. And even after these steps the controls functions not as properly as they should. It is definetely not an "easy to use" product.
  3. If i am wrong, then in this case i am happy to read this. I would appreciate an aircraft for MSFS like the CRJ for P3D (and i am happy with CRJ in P3D). I hope you understand that I am still a little skeptical at the moment and sorry for the simple thesis in my post before.
  4. Any third party aircraft is currently limited by the systems depth of the MSFS in my opinion. Is your aircraft more than a nice looking model or a simulation of the CRJ700? In my sight it is really annoying to have a good quality of graphics and then..........comes a lot of lack in simulation!
×
×
  • Create New...