gunther

You can always sign up for the $1 Xbox Game Pass for 10 days (which includes the PC version of 2024). That's what I did, to satisfy my curiosity. Then I went back to enjoy what I have with 2020. And for the record, 2024 performs way worse on my system (i7-9700K, RX6700XT, 64GB RAM, 4K) while 2020 runs just fine at a fixed 30fps at similar settings. I have to scale my display to 50% with 2024 to account for the graphic "improvements" (like trees, which admittedly are nice, and the displacement mapping ground textures, which are just fake anyway).

How do these kind of topics ("what we know will be released") always turn into "I wish somebody would make a <insert your favorite a/c>"? Rhetorical question, no need to reply...

The "update" is only the latest, monthly AIRAC cycle. Not causing any problems at my end.

"looks" being the operative word here. A year ago this would have been instabuy for me, even from Carenado, given that I flew them IRL. As would have been the T210. But as of recent they only release "pretty sweet looking" aircraft, with no obvious intentions to give us a properly working product, or at least to fix them in due course, as the did with some of the earlier 2020 aircraft. Maybe they're snowed under with all the work given to them by MS, or with their own long back catalog, but as Ryan said above, no money from me Mr. Carenado until you start fixing your recent "sweet looking" aircraft. Luckily BlackSquare came to the rescue, even if a 58 isn't quite the same.

The title should read "DO NOT BUY Carenado". FIFY The thing is (and I bought about 20 of their products for FSX/P3D) back in the day they used to release a couple of fixes/updates after the initial mess, and with dedicated people (read Bert Pieke), that made them enjoyable and semi-realistic to fly in the end. Nowadays, there are generally NO updates (certainly not for their LLs and FFs) and much of the config is hidden behind market place encryption and unfixable by the community. So all we have now with them is a puppy farm. Very pretty to look at, but don't expect fully functional, realistic and let alone system depth.

The textures may be the same, but the path names to them will be different. Should be a fairly simple edit of the xml files if you're up to it.

Just install the mod in the Community folder. No need to copy any textures.

Concur. Very disappointing, after having spent 100+ hours on a FREE airport scenery, getting hundreds of downloads on fs.to, to have one user rock up and give you a lonely 3 stars for effort. Especially if the user's only contribution to the "community" consists of criticizing other people's work. fs.to is bad enough with reviews since it enforces a period between download and comment/rate. Kind of a good idea on paper, but most people just can't be bothered to come back later to comment/rate. But I can just imagine a review forum here on avsim that allows gratuitous commenting on other people's free work. It would discourage anyone starting out (and I have seen huge improvements in some freeware developers over time) and people might just stop sharing. So by all means, keep highlighting outstanding contributions (like this OP). But limit criticisms and ratings to developers who want to extract money from your wallets. My 2cents.

Where are you flying? PG areas are fine. It's in the non-PG areas that you'll find most of the degradation. And not necessarily everywhere, but anywhere there is already poor sat imagery it's way worse.

Honest question: what does this give me that I don't already have in the Flysimware 35A?

Btw. I bought it for 2020, but it did show up later in 2024 (I have Standard through the game pass) but as a "2020/Unconfirmed" product.

You can now also buy it in the 2024 marketplace if you only have Standard.

I'm in virtually exactly the same boat as you. Spent my early career flying charters in a C55 and fondly remember it as the best-flying aircraft I ever got my hands on. Sadly, but not unexpected, Carenado will not do it justice, even though it looks pretty enough. Never much liked the Milviz effort either, but I'd certainly would prefer theirs. No idea if that's even on their list to do. I'm now holding my breath for the Blacksquare Twin Commanders instead.

I had been working on a couple of small add-on airports in Australia before the SU16 announcement, but then stopped since I didn't want to redo things after SU16. One thing SU16 does is align the Bing aerial textures (they were previously off by up to 2 metres in some eplaces). All well and good. Anyway, I resumed working on them yesterday, and yes, the imagery is more recent now (by no means current) but seriously low-rez! While with the pre-SU16 aerials I could easily identify ground markings, cones, runway lights etc. at those airports, the SU16 imagery is just a blur and I have to guess where things go. I understand now why lots of people were complaining about 2024 being being worse as far as aerials are concerned. Well, no longer!

Many many years ago, soon after they entered service, I had the opportunity to fly jump seat on a -300 from YPAD to YSSY and was amazed at all that fancy new tech lol flying automated holds etc. Now CSS are advertising this with "NO GPS". I wonder how well the LNAV (INS) is modeled in this thing, or whether it's just a hidden default GPS. For the price, it better be modeled.