eaglewing7

The reaction of continued stick up inputs was likely due to the disorientation of having your instruments giving conflicting and false readings along with being in IFR conditions. Being in IFR conditions you have no visual cues, which means you need to rely on your instruments, when the instruments are telling you conflicting and false information due to the blocked Pitot and Static ports that is what will happen. Also the human inner ear is unreliable in situations like this where visual cues are not available as the mind will then trick the pilots. Its quite unfortunate that this happened, but I doubt anyone would be able to recover in that situation simply due to the aforementioned conditions, which were also exacerbated by the flight being at night. Maybe if this had happened during the day there would have been a better chance of recovering the aircraft from the stall...

Here is a selection of key combinations that can help you in times of trouble... http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1533

Updating the desktop, in other words buying a new one, would be much more beneficial to you. I doubt you would see any difference changing form the laptop to the desktop, there both pretty gutless...

Have you tried climbing with the vertical speed mode? It looks like all you are doing is pitching up, and hitting the ALT button, which should work in theory, but for some reason I think you might be doing something else wrong... Are you sure that the Autopilot is actually engaged, and on the AUTO mode and not just ON?

Could it be that inadvertently you've set the target altitude to 45,000 feet, instead of 4500?

Well it's good to see that you do provide a version, regardless of it being outdated, of the navigraph data. The errors, etc, while I find them to be a part of every payware release, it just seems like there have been a few with this model, likely due to the insane amount of anticipation that has been applied to this model.

I'm considering purchasing this aircraft but have one question, and some concerns... My question, is navigraph necessary, or is it simply an optional part of this model? Also, my concern is just the sheer number of "issues" that have been reported so far. I'm having trouble figuring out what is simply operator/installer errors, versus what might actually be a problem. While I'm sure Javier and XAviation will fix any issues asap, it makes me want to wait a little bit longer before purchasing.

The banking is caused by the Mu-2's rather aggressive engines, reading the manual you will find that one needs to set the roll trim before takeoff. Then after takeoff readjust the trim, continuing to do so after every power change, and then before landing. Roll trim is quite important to the overall stability of this aircraft.

Did you properly set up a PTT button?

No, they should just count up. They don't have any meaning as a compatibility score or something... I didn't think they meant anything, if they did there would have been something within the initial write up, or the X-Aviation page that said watch for the number...

It works quite nicely. Do the numbers correlate to anything important? I was watching them climb, but decided to quit at 70 or so... Model Name: iMac Model Identifier: iMac8,1 Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo Processor Speed: 3.06 GHz Number Of Processors: 1 Total Number Of Cores: 2 L2 Cache: 6 MB Memory: 4 GB NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS: Chipset Model: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS Type: GPU Bus: PCIe PCIe Lane Width: x16 VRAM (Total): 512 MB Vendor: NVIDIA (0x10de) Device ID: 0x0609 Revision ID: 0x00a2 ROM Revision: 3234

Problem is finding somewhere that sells the products. On the North American site, you can only search for stores via a zip code, which isn't helpful if your in Canada as you have a postal code, which appears to be one digit or letter longer...

Don't worry you can always get them something from here... http://www.authenticmodels.com

Everything sounds good, except the prop... http://www.flyjsim.com/index.php Let me just direct you to the link above, why do the splashed images at the top of the site show Dash 8's with blurred props? Sure they look to be early development versions, but why has that been removed from the model now? A few comments from MSFS users over at the Flight Sim Economy forum have been why are the engines stopped in flight? Might be something worth looking into, simply to make it look a bit better in screenshots.

As of yet I am still pondering whether or not to purchase the aircraft. So far I have read the review (which seems objective, and to the point, like all other XP10 reviews), I am in the process of asking people I know who have purchased, or are considering purchasing, and just generally asking questions... So far I have noticed in every screen shot of the Dash, it always appears as if the engines are shut down and the props are stopped, why is this? Is this some sort of 3D special effect prop animation gone awry (like the BK-117 when at some angles and in clouds the rotors appear distorted)? Anyway, I'm still waiting more information, and would like more responses from the development team with regards to what they are considering to improve the model, and also just answering questions and concerns in an objective manner. No need for personal attacks or flame wars...

Good to see the project is still flying, and an honest post about the state of the project is warmly welcomed by everyone. As the old saying goes; no news, is good news... Maybe one day rather soon something will jump out at us here, a new project, an unexpected release? Needless to say, when something goes on un-announced, it is much more exciting to see its release, than waiting for something that has been delayed for any reason (and I do understand developer frustration is likely much higher than consumer frustration simply because they would like to see a project off of their work load rather than taking any more development time-thus I am not commenting on this or any other project that has been delayed, I understand that delays are an inevitability in life, and patience often brings great rewards).

Also, look at the total rendered textures size, it is over 300mb, which is over the capacity of your video cards 256mb... Turn down the rendering options, and you will get better results.

No, iMac video cards cannot be upgraded. What is more important is the rendering options used. Post a screenshot of the rendering options on your iMac.

On the panel, there are some lights near the control column on the pilot's side, one of them (can't remember which one off the top of my head) activates the doors to open and close.

As long as there well organized, possibly in a similar manner to XPFR's B-17 quick start check list, or even a full length check list a .pdf version would work just fine.

The picture your asking about, it looks a lot like a modified T6 Texan. The landing gear bays have that classic round shape which gives it away, and the tail looks like a Texan as well.

Very nice looking cockpit, just wondering about the addition of a Garmin 430 (?) that was discussed a while back... For some reason I think there was talk of having a panel with a 430 added, simply as an advanced navigation equipment option. Is this being pushed back for another update, as if it is, that is alright.

I definitely will, and have enjoyed it. It is a well modelled machine, and it likes to bite back when your not paying attention... Guess I better contact Khamsin, regarding him cranking up the netbook killing polys, lol.

In a sense, you're right. Nonetheless, this is definitely not true about the interior, only for exterior, as the number of textures had to be reduced to a minimum. With default "A" view, exterior should appera just fine - it's not intended to come too close. Interior is, I guess, not lacking in visual graphics, so that's not what you're concerned about. Anyway, why this choice? Because it's the one plane ANYONE can fly with FPS confort, and this was part of our desiderata. We do planes, very nice planes I dare say, and planes for everybody, not only for those who have the luck to have a nice computer and the money to buy planes. Going with a high poly model is simply redoing the whole stuff... for free? Well... I understand your concern, but it's just not what the plane is intended for... Needless to say my comments were taken out of context, which was likely my fault for not going into greater detail... I find the cockpit to be modelled beautifully, with only minor things such as a little bit of the text being a bit hard to read, but it is excellent. As for the rest of the aircraft interior, there is in my opinion, no need to go into great detail with the modelling, simply because it will hog frames and bog people down. The exterior was my only minor complaint, as it would be really nice to see this aircraft given it's deserved justice with a high poly exterior and high resolution liveries. I understand what is involved in making aircraft like this, many thousands of hours, and lost sleep to say the least. And I do thank XPFR for their tireless efforts to make the best aircraft available, my comment was a mere suggestion, and hopefully was not taken as a derogatory remark. Keep up the good work, and if you were ever to make this into a payware model with high res and high poly, I would be sure to buy it.

While I definitely love the B-17, and this model does an excellent job with system modelling realism, I find it sadly lacks in visual quality... The Ercoupe, had absolutely beautiful visual details and was a fully 3D model, why not make a separate high quality, high poly model of the B-17 for those who can use it, along with the current low poly model? Needless to say, a high poly model, on top of the excellent system modelling would be a dream come true for X-Plane pilots.