mjl1966

Welp, I guess this is my cue to finally upgrade to X-Plane. I use Aivlasoft on every flight. Import Simbrief flight plan, get taxi directions, keep track of my flight. It is the best addon I've ever purchased. And yea, this is why online licensing is such a scourge. I've lost many things over the years because of licensing servers. Technically a breach of contract, but what are you gonna' do? I hope the maker understands the value of their product to the community. It was a fantastic product.

lol. ikr. I went through all the docs that come with it and was pulling my hair out trying to find what looks like a properly formatted checklist.

Where is this actually documented? I do not see this procedure in any of the docs that come with the Majestic.

Point being, sir, that PMDG has no 747 offering at this time. Since you took the old version off the market (for all the very good technical reasons you stated at the time), we are left holding an empty bag in terms of a PMDG 747 to fly. (I'm not going to reinstall FS9 to fly the one I do have.) It is difficult to not have anything at all than it is to have something old while we wait for the new. There is competition and they do have a product. You do not. I mean no disrespect, but I think you would agree that with no 747 to buy, we are not entirely unreasonable in asking the simple questions, "will you make a new one?" and "when?" You've said you are making a product and then treat us with some impertinence when we press for any details. We are not trying to be difficult, we are simply anxious to have something to actually purchase. You announced it - nobody you forced you to. A lighter touch on your part would be in order under the circumstances. I submit that "We're making something new but quit asking about it" will not rein in the pantheon of customer relations. -MIke Lawrence

Anybody know what Tom did in the Navy? I have a thought in mind for a promo video.

Just wanted to say thanks for sharing this. I had the exact same problem in a totally different airplane and the DX10 fixed it. I never would have guessed.

I ran into this as well, 30 minutes into my first evaluation of the product. This = dead stop on purchase.

Wow, talk about disappointment. I watched lots of videos and downloaded documentation from CLS which clearly depicted fully funcitonal INS. I used the CIVA extensively with RFP and this looked like a way to get back to that mode in FSX. Got all excited and bought the airplane today (FSX HD) and found the INS is not implemented at all, is now a sticker on the center console and has been replaced by two toy CDu's. What the hell happened? (Yeah, I know, "f-lite" happened. Pretty clear what the "f" stands for) So, is there any way to get the "real" version of this add-on or am I just screwed? Would just like to know if I have any hope here or just need to chalk this up to a wasted 30 bucks and move on. Michael J Lawrence

Every time I go to Flightaware and look up JS41 in the flight tracker, zero flights show up. I think I remember seeing one - just one - a while back. People are still flying DC-3s, but not the Jetstream. Any idea why this is? Mike Lawrence

I have done nothing but pull my hair out trying to get this product to come close to delivering what it promises. GREAT idea. POOR implementation. I don't know what magic the people who like this are using, but after reading the manual countless times and working with the program for many hours off and on over the past several months, it simply is not close to reliable enough to be sold retail. When I do get an airplane configured and an airline that likes it and a scheduled flight to actually be available in the CDU when I start the flight, it is a small miracle. This thing has been nothing but a time sink. It LOOKS great in the cockpit. It SOUNDS great in the cockpit. It RARELY WORKS. Frustrating as hell. It does work sometimes. But I never know when or why it's going to. It's like a hot girlfriend with a drinking problem. If there is a way to trip over something during the process, I've found it. I have literally sat with this thing 4 and 5 hours at a time trying to troubleshoot it. Finally realized I don't work for Dutch and uninstalled it and removed every trace of it from my machine so I wouldn't be tempted to "try again". Iv'e "tried again" four times now and I wind up the same way every time, severely frustrated.

Whether or not PMDG is developing for P3D has no effect whatsoever on the licensing of P3D to its end users. P3D is not licensed to be used by the vast majority of those reading this forum. I don't have a second cousin in a scenery company, nor am I legal counsel for anyone. I can, however, read. EULA's are designed to tell end users (that's us) the terms of use in a format that can be understood by people without J.D. in their title. I am also highly confident in my ability to discern the legal definitions of "home entertainment" and "consumer use." PMDG may be developing for P3D. This is good news for them and good news for us in that one of the prime providers of add-ons for our hobby will thrive and continue to make products for us - on FSX and XP. signed - Michael J Lawrence

My posts typically tend to range from the opinionated to the outright contentious, with the rare expression of contentment for good measure. Then there are those once-every-few-years occasions where I feel compelled to sing praise. I have flow a real stick in a 152, 172, Luscombe, Tomohawk and Archer. I learned to fly an airplane before I learned to drive and grew up around general aviation during its brief heyday in the 70's. I am not a PPL, but I have soloed. (Money, like time, is fleeting. ) In the sim world, I have hundreds of hours on the Falcon series, from F1 back in 1989 up through 5.0, which I set aside when I started my FS9 career around 2005 or so. I now have hundreds of hours on FS9 on a variety of aircraft, from 152 to 747 and lots in between. My experience with FSX is much less, but I have a few big brand names in my hangar, including PMDG. Throughout my "career" as a sim pilot, I have found myself on a quest for a good turboprop during most of that time. I have had a couple that came really close to being just right, but were missing that certain something or had minor flaws or imperfections that kept it from being "just right". The ones I remember as being the most enjoyable include the AFG 350 and the Aeroworx B200. Then there's the PMDG B41. After going through the tutorial and spending a few hours learning this fine bird, my first reaction is to wonder why everybody else can't do it this way. This bird sets the bar and is the best sim prop I have flown, hands down. There are a few little things that you can tell were probably difficult to accomplish that put this airplane, and the experience of flying it, into a class of their own. It takes off like a real airplane. You have to crank back on the yoke and it rotates slowly at first, rather than yanking off the runway like everything else in FSX. When landing, it slows down and keeps coming down when you start your flare, like you would expect a 20,000 pound airplane to do. Every single other turbo I've flown floats down the runway like a hockey puck. the J41 flies with a heavy stick and is quite stable, just like a real airplane, without feeling like it's on false rails. In short, this plane acts like a plane and responds to inputs the way a plane is supposed to, something which is oddly elusive in so many others. It also has a power curve that feels genuine. Getting into the teens, you sit back and wait a while as it moseys up to altitude. So many others don't seem to know the difference between SL and FL except for the gauges, whose indications are rendered moot by an airframe that over performs. These are the things that really stand out that I can sort of put into words. There's so much more, of course. And it does have its problems, just like any complex FSX bird, but they are so small compared to the sheer reality of the overall design that they are easily sidestepped. For my part, the only bug I have encountered is the navigation system flying north instead of on track. VOR is a great workaround, so it's livable. At the end of the day, though, the J41 is the turboprop I have been waiting for since my first FS flight in 2005. You can tell this one wasn't about the money. My only disappointment is that there isn't a full line of PMDG props. -MJL

Duplicate post due to "service unavailable" error.

I agree with you on the steam. I grew up on steam guages and could fly an airplane before I could drive a car, so it's very ingrained in me. My question with the fancy glass, especially on a single engine prop, is what happens when the engine goes out and the generator quits working? Pitot tube is still going to give me altitude, airspeed and VSI. Magnetic compass tells me which direction I'm flying. I can get home on that. Black glass with three little steam backups down by my knee? Seriously, is that really a good idea in a 172? Turboprops, not so much of a problem, but I still prefer the stuff that literally works on thin air.

How is the new one compared to the old Aeroworx? I love my Aeroworx b200 with the exception that you have to drag the throttle into beta range to slow down enough to land. Anybody who has flown both - what would you say?

Um, can I get a confirmation on the original intent of the topic here? After looking at the original post and the licensing table, it is my understanding that this is meant to clarify, for the developers who participated, whether or not their FSX add-ons may be used with P3D. As for the rest of the material contributed to the thread, is there an equally concise presentation regarding if and how I may use P3D without having to consult an attorney?

Like many people, I have oodles of add-ons in FS9, which means moving to FSX involves a substantial financial "investment" well beyond just the cost of the sim itself. I have encountered a characteristic in FSX that is making me stop short and I was wondering what others might have to say about it. When I fly the default 172 in FS9, it behaves fairly well. When I rotate, it's smooth and the airplane lifts off the runway nice and easy. Typical for just about any aircraft in FS9. When I fly the default 172 in FSX, the story is quite different. When it comes time to lift off, the airplane leaps into the air and pitches up very quickly. Entirely different experience. Same thing with the default Baron. I've tried setting the sensitivities to both extremes. The only effect of setting sensitivity to zero is that it takes more throw to get the airplane to rotate, but once it does, I get the same "pitch and leap" behaviour. Landings are a similar story - lots of gyrating with minimal control input. I've only experimented with the 172 and the Baron, as I have no payware for FSX. My question: Is this related to the aircraft or is this a general characteristic of the sim? i.e. is FSX just "twitchier" than FS9 or are the default aircraft I've tried just poorly designed? Who else has had this experience and what are your thoughts?

Very nice. :)

After reading some of the responses from senior members who are enjoying this new product, I've come to realize that posting my complaints about Flight really doesn't help anything. This is your forum to discuss this new game as a group of people actually playing it. Who am I to come in and crash the party just because it isn't my cup of tea?There are some good things here. Maybe Flight will broaden the flight enthusiast audience. Maybe this will lead to a broad enough audience to justify investing development resources in FS11. Maybe it will bring in new friends who otherwise would not get involved in our little world. Or maybe there will be a lot more people who download it, enjoy it, and come to Avsim to get the same great benefits of this community that we have all gotten over the years.I have good reasons to complain, but I can do that somewhere else.So, enjoy your new game. I'm sorry for crashing your party. It's all stick and rudder. The rest is just ascii.-MJL

OK, thanks for the clarification. I am sincerely thankful to you guys for taking the time to get all the details for us.

Gentlemen, I would respectfully submit that your dismissal of expressionso of disappointment as "elitist" is unfair. Microsoft made MANY remarks which would lead a reasonable person to believe that we were entitled to expect Flight to carry on with much of the legacy features we have come to enjoy with the flight sim franchise. In fact, their remarks indicated, very clearly, that flight will appeal to a broader audience and still provide the same experience more "advanced" simmers have dome to expect. This clearly has not happened. We are entitled to yell "foul" as we have been, at the least, misled. We have a legitimate gripe, and it's not that Flight is far short of FS11. It's that we were told it wouldn't be. The elephant in the room is that we knew they were spinning instead of delivering. To express frustration at being told to expect something far more than was actually delivered is not elitist. It's normal.

I just want to make sure I have this 100% right. As I understand it from the Avsim review, there is not equivalent of the gamepack that came with MS2K 2K2 9 and 10. I take that to mean that developers cannot create add-ons such as aircraft, airports, weather management, ATC, etc..? Is this correct? Am I also correct in concluding that this means VATSIM will not be able to use Flight?These are straight questions, not commentary. Seriously asking.

The problem I have with the Avsim review is that it tries to string along those of us who have come to expect a full flight simulation experience. Flight does not provide that. Fine. But don't tell me it's going to meet the expectations of the current FS audience. Tell me the truth. It's a great flight simulator for the jump-in-and-fly crowd. If you want the full experience of navigation, avionics, and the wealth of immersion provided by the current flightim ecosystem via add-ons, Flight is not for you. And don't talk to me about DLC. Hope and Change by another name. There are reasons to promote and even enjoy Flight. But not for any of us who take our simming experience a little more seriously than sight-seeing in a Stearman. Microsoft is absolutely right, this is not a simulator. You guys need to portray this fact for what it is. Instead, you tell me it isn't, at the moment, but might be soon. That's irritating. Tell me what is, everything else is marketing.Every incarnation of flight sim did what its predecessor did and a little more. This is a clean break from the franchise and removes *EVERYTHING* that's important to me as a flight simmer. Now, if they get it together and give me back at least what I had in FS9, then I will gladly stand tall as you throw eggs at me. But you and I both know that's not going to happen.

So, after reading the Avsim review in its entirety, Here's what I've learned.1. I can't fly from anywhere to anywhere. I can fly around Hawaii. There is no underlying model of the world. I can pay $20 to download more of Hawaii. 2. I have to hack a file to use my Saitek flight controls and I can only map to a few controls. And no differential brakes.3. Nobody will be able to write 3rd party mods for this environment. Only M$ DLC will be available.4. Nobody will be able to interface with the program whatsoever except through M$ DLC.5. Lots of promises about DLS. Sounds like Hope and Change to me.OK, so what this means for me is that M$ is giving me nothing and is not letting anybody else give me anything either. If you're going to lock out the entire flight sim ecosystem without replacing it with something, there is zero hope for Flight being adopted by the current M$ flightsim market. So, what am I supposed to like about all this exactly?Steve Balmer obviously has no clue about his market and has just lost every single flight sim user that is currently flying. (The casual simmers quit a long time ago.)And what's up with the review? You guys basically told me all of the things we suspected are true but that somehow that's OK because it will magically get better later. Some day. Some how. Give me a break. Where's the press release on when and how they are going to give us back our 24000 airports? Show me that and I'll listen. Some day. Some how. Maybe.Fine. I'll wait and see. But they have a LONG way to go before they even come close to what I have come to expect from my flight simming "user experience".And X-PLANE is throwing a big party right now. And they should. Steve just handed them the entire current FS community. On a silver platter.And I was one of those saying "Wait, surely they understand they need to take care of the current simming community. They're not idiots." Boy, was I wrong.