If you want a Honeycomb Alpha for Christma you better order fast because we are quickly running out of stock!

Jump to content

Emanuel Hagen

admins
  • Content Count

    9875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    103

Everything posted by Emanuel Hagen

  1. It is not just hard, it is impossible. People are thinking too much into those full flight simulators. During the type rating when you start on the fixed base sim you think"wow, what a great airplane to fly", then you go to the full flight sim and you're thinking "wow, that fixed base sim was really shit". Then you go to the real aircraft and..... guess what After half a year you then go back to the sim for your first recurrence check. And believe me, it'll be the worst flying experience you'll ever have, the thing handles so shitty, you will hardly believe it is actually simulating that aircraft you just collected 400h on. From your second RST onwards you'll then be given couple free takeoffs and landings by your instructor as they know how different it is from the real aircraft. This is of course just the normal handling of the aircraft. You can imagine though what the abnormals must look like. To be fair though: I do not want to get any chance to verify or deny this.
  2. Yes and no. Yes on a dry runway or on a wet (braking action good) runway. These are the two states P3D knows. No for a contaminated runway or any other braking action than good. The sim simply does not know about the many variations you find in real life. The sim only knows: Runway dry/wet. I find it interesting how some other developers claim their aircraft would react correctly for all kinds of runway states: How should their aircraft even know whether there are 3mm of slush or 6mm? Whether it's Braking Action Medium or Poor? Or Medium-Poor? Or maybe patches or snow or ice? Frozen Water on top of compacted snow? These are all options we calculate for in real life. Neither P3D nor any weather addon can simulate those. In my last recurrence simulator we trained for proper actions in case of loss of control if the runway state is different than expected. Part of that training was the effect of thrust reverse and brakes on a contaminated runway and on a frozen runway. Believe me, no high end addon on the market is able to show even remotely what happened there.
  3. The difference is QW and PMDG read directly from Active Skies memory however our radar reads directly from the simulator. This enables ours to work with all weather addons and even with default weather while QW and PMDG can ONLY work with Active Sky and not with any other weather addon. AS2012 did not incorporate the ability to simulate a weather radar at all, therefore they simply injected everything in the sim. If you use AS2012 you will therefore see it all on our weather radar. With ASP4 they no longer do this, now it all happens in the memory of the program instead of in the simulator and they pretty much only inject the direct weather at your aircrafts position. This causes trouble to all weather radars reading weather from the simulator. You will see the same results in the REX/MilViz radar which also reads directly from the simulator. In other words: We show you exactly what is in your simulator. Active Sky does not inject many parameters such as turbulence into the simulator but only injects them over some hacks when you actually reach the turbulent area. That makes it impossible to read it in advance.
  4. I like my aircraft clean for instance Most "dirt" I usually see on those I fly in real life is dead insects on the gear struts. Even on brand new aircraft (flown one which was 10 days old at that time!) the front of the gear struts is already covered in dead bees, flies, etc. Apart from that even in regular service our aircraft are usually kept quite clean. Most "dirty" paints in the community I find to look like they were parked on a boneyard for 20 years or longer. I am yet to see such dirty aircraft actually in passenger - or for the matter of fact even cargo - service.
  5. Based on my experience they work quite fine if you simply install them and add them manually to the scenery libary. Of course no support given but you can definitely use them.
  6. Depends on what kind of zoom level you want to use. I use a 44" screen and have no problems whatsoever seeing all I need to see.
  7. We use P3D radios, so whenever Lockheed upgrades P3D to support 8.33kHz ours will also have it.
  8. There is a lot of work involved in creating other engine variants, based on past experience developing the A320 series you can take a couple of months per engine or aircraft variant. This said, keep in mind it was never said it will not be done! All that has been said is that initially the A330-300RR will be developed. If there is demand for it and if it is feasible to do so you can be sure other versions will follow!
  9. We have had the discussion about failures often enough by now, the summarized result is: The vast majority of simmers only use them once or twice and then do not touch them anymore. Seeing that the amount of work needed to simulate those failures would pretty much doubt the product price we do not see it justified and therefore do not model failures.
  10. Which of course does not mean you can not paint a Delta livery and fly it nontheless. How many simmers flew the 777-200LR instead of the ER, not even talking about the different engine versions which were available on the -200ER compared to the -200LR
  11. The resolution of the textures tells you nothing about how the addon will look in the end. It depends on how much fuselage is mapped to a certain space of textures. An easy example to make it easier to understand: Imagine you have one single 4096px texture and try to squeeze the complete aircraft in it: There will not be much space left per aircraft part. Now imagine having 48 1024px textures: That gives you twice as much space for the actual aircraft than the single 4096 file. Therefore the 1024px texture would look more detailled. Stefan is doing an excellent job to give you a detailled aircraft, just look at those close up previews already seen (for example those of the cargo hold or the wheel well) or wait until you have the final product in your simulator and I can assure you you will not be disappointed.
  12. No, why would you want to do so? Please please please, read before posting. It's not been long since I commented with exactly what you want to know.
  13. A clear sign of P3D's roots in Microsoft logic which was basically Boeing logic. In Boeings pressing the brake pedals is the way to release the parking brake. We'll see if something can be done here, but it has quite a low priority.
  14. Der BIAS macht nichts anderes als die berechnete Treibstoffmenge mit dem BIAS zu multiplizieren. Hast Du einen Cruise Fuel Bias von 4% eingestellt, dann wird die berechnete Treibstoffmenge für den Reiseflug mit 1.04 multipliziert, es werden also 4% mehr Treibstoff für den Reiseflug berechnet, als aus den Daten des PFPX Aircraftprofiles hervorgeht.
  15. Gerne Maggy. Nur um das nochmal ganz klar zu stellen: Im echten Nürnberg ist es genauso. It's not a bug, it's a feature!
  16. Bei vielen Flughäfen dieser Größe ist es normal, dass ein Tankwagen kommen muss. Die Tanke in Düsseldorf wird zB auch nicht genutzt und es kommt immer der Tankwagen. Zapfsäulen sind eher etwas für die kleinen Flughäfen.
  17. Which producttitle is shown in your purchase confirmation e-mail or on the title of your box?
  18. Alright, so we got the aircraft. Now we need the addon as I asked earlier on already
  19. Which aircraft addon is this about?
  20. Please follow the steps given in the first post of this thread.
  21. In fact this is actually a feature and not a bug. We left this small easter egg in just in case somebody does an incorrect fuel planning and does not want to divert. Therefore nothing to be fixed here, it's there on purpose. Surely there must be something else happening on your system that causes such little fuel consumption. It is definitely not normal and it does not seem like there are many other customers encountering the same issue which makes it unlikely (though of course not impossible) to be a bug.
  22. And to be fair Dave, I am one of those who was unhappy with the MD80 soundset, so I bought the TSS soundset and included it in my maddog. Now I hear my engines and all is good. What most, if not all, simmers forget is: We sit in the cockpit wearing ANR headsets. Well, at least most of us do, I know at least one colleague flying with an 80€ GA headset, but that's a different topic. Under my ANR headset I hardly hear the engines at all. It even goes so far that sometimes in cruise I put my Bose ANR headphones over my aviation headset, just to get that additional ANR. Then it becomes totally quiet. Well, at least except for the aircraft sounds picked up by our microphones which are then returned into the system. When the intercom is turned off though you don't hear a thing anymore. Total silence! And honestly, that's how I like it the most at work Yet when sitting at my sim at home my flatmates usually complain my sim is too loud. That's life, isn't it?
  23. Do you have and use a joystick as outlined in the system requirements? If you don't have one please get one as you can not control the AIrbus with the keyboard, but need to use a joystick instead.
  24. The right ND is a copy of the left ND at the moment, same for the PFD btw. Thus you'll only see the VOR1 indication.
  25. I have never heared of this issue yet, nor do I recall seeing any customer with it. My best bet would be to reinstall the latest client of your P3D (client only, not the full sim!). Whatever causes this issue is likely to happen somewhere on a deeper level.
×
×
  • Create New...