Leaderboard

OK, thanks anyway Jan. The information to edit could also be in one of the cockpit obj files: I'll have another look and post back if I do find a solution. :-)

Thanks for the info AoA, I watch a lot of YT video's, a few on the -300, many -400 (as they are still flying) and many NG versions. Looking at there routes, weather, alternates etc and see that landing with 3.5T or more is very common. But it works very similar in XP11, nice weather, close alternates etc, can land with 2500kg most of the time. But I have a very adventurous side with this aircraft, Oslo - Svalbard is one of my favourite routes, that's 16'000kg of fuel every time, and from USA WA regions up to Yellowknife is also a favourite. I also love flying in and out of 4000-5500ft runways (currently based in KAWO Arlington) and flying to remote Canadian locations, so fuel tankering is a factor along with bad weather and very hard mountain tops!

yea, time for an avatar update, that's one's 14 years old....still into my early 40s at the time. Shows you how much I pay attention to that stuff...but don't want to be misleading -tk

@Ian Hi, I have checked the behavior on the XP12 version I am testflying right now, but I am sure that the logic for this was not touched since the XP11 version: When moving the pack switches to OFF (moving between auto and high should have no effect) the N1 indicated on the N1 LIMIT page increases by 1.0 percent N1 - this is correct and according "to the book". It makes sense, too - without the bleed air being extracted to drive the packs you can create more thrust before you hit the EGT limit. What is probably missing is getting the same effect when turning OFF the engine bleeds - as you would in a takeoff where the APU powers the packs (as opposed to having packs off for an unpressurized takeoff). I will add an issue to our internal list to also add this dependency. Cheers, Jan

Not for some time. The cockpit looks great in XP12, even after 13 years since its first incarnation. PBR effects are applied in several areas of the cockpit already. There is a limit to the resolution of the textures where more does not necessarily equal better and a specific balance was chosen at the onset. One thing that has not changed much over the years is monitor "dot pitch'...with a few exceptions (Apple's retina display). Having chosen a minimum distance from camera to surfaces that we consider reasonable for a good simulation experience....and also in consideration of anti-aliasing algorithms, we have found that going higher and higher resolution results in poorer detail at the nominal viewing distances and there is a 'sweet-spot' balance between resolution and anti-aliasing algorithms. Anti-aliasing gets less effective at 'too high' resolutions and you get more 'jaggies', not less. Sure, when you get the camera right up on the surfaces, they look good then, but if a real pilot had to get as equally close to a surface to see its detail, you would most certainly question his last eye exam. As such, we selected a nominal range of camera distances from surfaces for typical simming activites and developed our resolutions based on those use cases. Going any higher doesn't yield any worthwhile benefit in our experience as of yet. I'm not saying there's not room for improvements in a few areas...but relative to other ares of the 3D, its certainly one of the better textured areas and not at the top of the list for improvement.....and we're quite proud of how good it still looks in XP12 after 13 years. Nils Danielson did an unbelievable job of texturing the cockpit, best I've ever seen to this day IMO, and those who have experienced his work and the immersion it imbues (myself included) know what I'm talking about. We'll keep on eye on it, vs the state of the art technologically, and if there's something we feel we can do that will improve the immersion experience, we'll ceratainly put it on our wish / todo list and try and knock that out. -tkyler

Another successful testflight this morning - Flagstaff, Az to Tucson, Az. We are still ironing out some issues, but here are two screenshots (one showing the current look of the new GUI).

@AngelOfAttack That is certainly viable - and I know some airlines also use the DH to provide some sort of terrain awareness. However, you still get the automatic radio altimeter callouts, so if your minimum is 200 feet above the threshold, the automatic "200" callout will double as a (close) reminder. When approaching in considerably better than minimum weather conditions we used to be just brief "minimum is visual" but that was later reversed as sometimes weather was surprisingly worse than expected and no minimum was set that the crew could refer to as the plane got closer to the runway but could not pick it up visually.

I really hope that the PT-19 will be updated for X-Plane 12. It's a great plane and rather unique. Unfortunately, most simmers seem to like following a magenta line instead of looking out of the window...