AVSIM Reviews Feedback

During the editing process, a section of the submitted document was purposely left out. However, the information about the weather radar was in there. Here is PMDG's answer:"it

I've just read your review of Call! for 737 PIC and Legacy PIC, which is good IMHO.I just wanted to let you know that you should like the new Airbus Call! because many points from your review are improved in the Airbus version of the Call! program.I can't wait to read the review of Airbus Call! :( Eric

Hello to everyone. :( I just wanted to let everyone know that a correction will be made to the review for Section F8's F-86E/F. The change is simply the reference to the engine, which was listed as a J-79 turbojet, when in reality (at least for US models), it was a J-47.Thanks to the two individuals that got in contact with me to point out this shortcoming. This info, and your feedback, was much appreciated.Regards,Alexis EsguerraSr Contributing Reviewer

The review of Map! should have said, for completeness, that it doesn't work with 64-bit systems, only 32-bit ones. Petraeus

Hello,Just now I tried to send a mail to Angeliques van Kampen regarding her Carenado Cessna 152 review. Unfortunately the address [email protected] got bounced. Any ideas what could cause this? ThanxBest,Bert

Nice review on this little, sleak and sexy plane.The one thing I am missing is the implementation of the automatic governor of the real plane.The real thing will hold 2700 rpm with takeoff power and will maintain 2500 rpm with cruise power. There is no separate rpm lever (with the blue knob).Other than that it is a superb simulation.

I'd just like to correct Jeff on his review of the SR-71 Blackbird. He made a comment about the amount of blood on the edge of the forward canopy. This wasn't blood in reality. It was a combination of paint and high temp rtv compound we used when we did maintenance. Although there were spots on the canopy where you could cut yourself, I never saw blood where Jeff made his comments. Just a little insight from the real world of skunk works.

http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/review/capt757x.htmThe reviewer Kevin Glover states, "This was my first such airliner, and while I can't say I enjoyed the mass quantities of tedious script, I must say that I learned a lot, and hopefully this knowledge will leave me better prepared for similar packages I may fly in the future."While some might give him the benefit of the doubt, it is kind of tough to believe that they (Flightsim.com) would let someone review this package who has no experience with similar heavies (i,e. LDS767). What it hints to me is that they wanted a favorable review of this product (for future Capt Sim ad revinue purposes) without having to make…

Hi all,I just felt the need to pop over and say kudos to Etienne for his work on the DA Fokker. I am currently looking for a new addition to my FS hangar and I already had an eye on this product.I found the review to be very exhaustive, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses in a fair manner. The author's technical knowledge on flight sim's internals was also obvious. Best article I've read in quite a while, good job! :-beerchugThanks

http://www.avsim.com/pages/0206/737PIC/737PIC.htmI missed an important difference with the review: On what flightsim version has it been tested? The boxed version comes with both a FS2004 and a FSX version. I find it really makes a difference. In FSX I have many problems (FSX SP2) in FS2004, those problems don't exist.Eric W

I would just like to congratulate the Editor and the writers for the incredible amount of work that they put into the reviews. These articles keep coming out on a continuous basis and there has been no slow-down for a long time. It is all very impressive, given that everybody is a volunteer. Very well done to all.Best regards.Luis

Hello all,Having purchased and flown the coolsky maddog super pro since it came out, I have to admit that the review by Peter Clemenko leaves me speechless. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion but this so called "review" is very unfair to the quality of this product and makes me doubt if the author knows what he's talking about.So Super 80 pro captains, please read this avsim review and correct me if I'm wrong.Kind regards,Jos

For people who read and liked the review, or not, I would like everyone to know that in the Autumn of my life a foggy day can occur, and in that respect I had forgotten that during my flight hours on the Cherokee in the 1970's I was aware of not having a stall warning horn, merely a light indicating an impending stall."Senior Moment" everybody, forgetfulness does occur to retired people, sorry about that, but it does happen to the best of us.Too many years since then dealing with passenger jets I suppose.

Lately in reviews I have seen directly linked airliner.net photos (Credit is given though) as comparison to the product being reviewed. I thought directly linking Airliner.net photos was a major no no for them and also against AVSIM rules? Just curious if something has changed?

Hello all, First, to Anelique, I really did enjoy your article, you write well and seem to be most intelligent in the cockpit and a good operator.Saying that, I'm just wondering if YOU got the same CS 757 everyone else gets, or has CS finally gotten all the bugs out of the 757. I've always said CS had the most kick butt graphics in the business and some really nice touches, but the final product just didn't add up . . . Is there something new going on at CS that I don't know about?It would be a nice thought to think that such an eye pleasing aircraft finally did fly correctly with all the proper bells and whistles.Just wonderingBestClayhttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/i…

Hello,just a small heads up regarding your review of Aerosoft

Though I believe Tom has written a well-rounded, but brief review, he is leaving out one of the biggest downfalls of the product. He reviews it in FSX but leaves out that it isn't actually a FSX product. Then he complains about the limitations of FSX's software in the summary? I don't think he has any basis to complain about the limitations of FSX when the aircraft isn't actually made with the FSX compiler. That's like buying a Ford Taurus from 1995 and expecting it to have features that a 2008 BMW has but then Ford complains that it is too difficult to build a BMW or can't do it at Taurus costs. Tough... people expect the good features nowadays, and most developers a…

Hi Jim,Thanks for the feedback and taking the time to post your thoughts, much appreciated!As we know, the LDS 757 has not been released yet, so obviously we can't use that as a training sim :-) And before we received the product, I learnt from Kris that he did have the Captain Sim 757 - but considering the Block F with advanced systems has not been released yet I think it is not fair to compare the two addons in the sense that you refer to.Regarding frame rates. As always, these comments are based on the reviewers own personal experiences with the aircraft. I have had other detailed aircraft in my sim that perform better than the PSS 757, which is why I made those commen…

Okay,I have sent this via e-mail to Jeff as well, but I have some serious issues with the accuracy of his review, mainly in the "information" he attached as part of his narrative of the review and in addition his critiquing of an 18-month-old FS9 scenery in FSX, especially when the information on the aircraft just says that it's FSX compatible, not that it's an FSX product.Here is the text -1 You state,

One well known ex-hunter pilot would disagree with parts of the review. He was very unhappy with how it flew and how some of the VC was completely fictional.There is also no mention in the review of Dave Garwood's freeware Hunter which is a shame.

Wonderful to have you back! It's great that your real life has settled down enough that you are able to sit at that new computer and relax.I love your freeware reviews.

Quite a nice review but was very disappointed to see that not only were no screen pics of hte virutal cockpit included, neither was there a single comment or mention on the VC !Just because a review may not use the VC, shouldn't mean they should ignore it alltogether from their review - many, many people fly ONLY from the virtual cockpit these days!I'm not bashing the reviewer but he really should take this as fair feedback and ensure that the virtual cockpit is covered at least to some degree in future reviews.Thanks,

Hi I have read the review of the Hughes H-1 from Aerosoft.I can

I think the comparisions this review makes are a little off the mark.I disagree with the view this product would not appeal to intermediate users. It definitely would appeal to them as other 'Lite' type products and appeal to intermediate users. There are many intermediate users who although they could handle the setup process for the more detailed models but find it tedious and may not want to go through it every single flight. These Lite type of products offer them an less tedious way to fly during the times they do not wish to deal with such things as engine starts and FMS route loading.This Overland product is a 'Lite' product, its marketed and sold as such, so why is…

Hi,Good review by Chris - I agree with him that this is a stunning add-on and fantastic fun to fly.However, I cannot for the life of me understand what Chris means by "Window Mode only" in the 'things I don't like about it' section of his review.This add-on can be fully used and enjoyed in full screen mode!Perhaps Chris can clarify what he meant by this?Regards,David.