Nova

I read the manual, thats why this question came into my mind. That was meant as a fact, not as a question. So in the end, i will have to enter the holding by hand. Hmm, will be lots of work. Guess i will fly them by hand then. If you have a look at attachement1, you see lots of possible holdings (which are used at events) with legs that don't match with the course you fly to reach. So this means: while flying towards it, disengage autopilot, prepare the holding, change heading before reaching the fix (flying small s turn to align) and then re- engage the a/p so it flies the holding for you. Puuuh, what a workload. I really think flying it with a watch and by hand will be way less stressful and more accurate as well. :-\ Or maybe not more accurate, but the next thing is: what happens when you engage the a/p to hold over ROKIL after you already passed it. What will he do then? Ignore the hold? Make wired turns to start the hold over ROKIL, or just start it with an offset? ??? It will be interesting to see if the fmc can do the standard ils approach on runway 08L (attachement2). But i hardly doubt it, since there is not a single, or at least don't know of one, that can actually do it. They all make just a right turn after MIQ NDB instead of making the turn to overfly the NDB. And with some pilots flying 320 knots, this approaches is rarely flown right, and causes lots of go arounds (i'm atc on vastim up to arrival). In the end, only lots of testing will show, how good and useful this fmc will be. edit: pdf link deleted, images included instead

What about holdings? You can make a holding by using a waypoint and setting the turn to left/right. Or you perform a holding right where you are. But what about published holdings? Are those included in the airac/fmc data? Is there a way to tell the fmc which heading the in-/outbound leg has? A lot of holdings are designed to have a direct entry, where the leg is right on course where you fly to the fix that begins the holding. But what if you fly towards the holding fix with a heading of 100° but the legs should be flown with 90° in- and 270° outbound? And what about teardrop and parallel entries?

I find it strange, that such a high end computer like a fmc isn't able to add distances. The standard x-plane fmc always tells you how many miles you have to go to the waypoint you have currently selected. Makes descend planning really easy. Is this really not there in the real one, or just left out for a later update?

I really don't know what to think about all the "scratchpad" stuff in the manual, without having the fmc in front of me. It sounds to me, as you are never able to just type something in, but instead you have to got a a "scratchpad" however you access it, and then have always to copy and paste stuff. Just sounds wired and confusing to me. :-\ The whole auto tuning will be interesting too on VATSIM. Lets see if it will really find the right stations, and if there are none, if he uses UNICOM. Man i really hope you release it this weekend. Although it looks like i won't have that much time. :'(

Do you know, if those elevation data is found in any of these airacs? I wrote a php function, that reads the fix.dat and converts it into the X-Plane format. For nearly 190k fixes, it doesn't even need a minute. I found a script that uses perl to get the fix and nav data right, but i wasn't able to get perl to work. It wasn't a problem on the mac, back when i had one. However, the script was ridiculously slow. Took me more than an hour to get this done. But that was with airac 0902. Haven't been flying a year or more until 3 weeks ago. When i had to reinstall XP after i upgraded the hardware (just moving the folder fucked something up, x738 A/P wasn't working, no matter what) i had the standard data. So i gave the Robin Peels' data a try. Out of 7 waypoints, only 2 existed (flying mostly in germany on VATSIM) on a short 90NM flight. Not to mention what happend when i loaded an old flightplan that used about 40 waypoints. Even my old airac was now way too old, 3 missing waypoints and wrong ils frequencies. Since i don't have a fmc that uses airways, i don't care about them. The other function i wrote, searches and changes the ils, vor,... frequencies. Although their positions may be wrong (but they rarely change anyways, if ever) i have the right frequencies again. But having REAL data for everthing would be great! So hopefully your request/assistance on that matter will be successful.

Nice. Didn't know that your iPad app stores the data. Normaly you have to convert the data to get it into X-Plane. While the fix format is simple, the others are just painfull. I really don't know, why they still have no X-Plane data... And they won't even create one this year... >

Stop putting music in those videos....yet another i am not allowed to see cause of fucking bullshit damn music label restriction (i can't even express how upset i'm to live in germany... you are not allowed to do this, that drm here, right protected there....half of youtube is blocked)

Then hopefully you downloaded the PSS_nativ.zip too, or you won't have fun with them. The nav database is totaly outdated that ships with X-Plane. Sadly, i haven't been successfull to update he VOR/NDBs etc. because of the strange format that is used with seperate GS, ILS and VOR parts with all different stats. Only the fixes are up to date, and nav frequencies are being edited when i find wrong ones.

Boooohooooo! No axis for trim?!? :-[ Well, then not gonna buy it. Pah!

You really should have done Nuremberg. Who wants to life or fly over Fürth...pahh

So elevator trim will still not be visible with 1.5? And just for your list: the wheels are just a little bit to "big" or not enough retracted. On a light livery, you can still see a little bit of the rear wheels. 8) However, nice upgrade! W00T!

I know that, but it sounds like you think, that HT makes a huge difference. Just wanted to show you, that there is not such a huge difference between 4C/4T and 4C/8T. HT is used to minimize the idle times on the cpu, because instructions need some time to be prepared for the cpu itself. So while HT cpus give you more out of the same count of cores, they don't scale that well, and even worst when comparing price/value. That's all i wanted to say.

Which type of failure would i have to set, to get the engine shutdown while in air? The only faults i got, where either fire, loosing oil pressure or....i guess thats it. Once i lost the whole engine (752) and i didn't even notice it while i was in cruise. I thought it was hard crosswind Noticed it when i later approached the airport and handling got a bit wired on FL70 :

I got this from tomshardware.de and .com. They made a lot of cpu test with synthetic test and games. The i7-2600K (4C/8T) beat the more than three times expansive i7-980X(6C/12T) even by being clocked slower. So there is absolutely no need to buy a 880€ cpu, when you can get the same performance with a 240€ cpu. If you really utilize all cores, then yes, a i7-2600K would then be it. HT gives you 15-25% higher scores in those benchmark tools vs the i5-2500K. But you spend >41% more money, to get only 15-25% more performance. The i5-2500K is currently available for about 170€. Always keep in mind, those are numbers from the german market, could be different for you. But i guess you still get the idea But keep in mind, those benefits of a HT cpu, are not really there when it comes to gaming. It's only worth for a lot of en-/decoding and benchmarks.

Oooohh nooo!! Please leave stuff like that in the sim! All you need to do, is to write a good documentation

You cannot change the livery on the fly? :-\ And the MFD is your iPad, isn't it? And are the props now with the disc image, or did you manipulate the screenshot?

Get a pc for 1k bucks, and you will be finde, for the next 2-3 years. You never know what you get, when you buy a mac. i5 sounds nice, but which one? I guess thats one of the old pre-sandy. Those are about 20% slower than sandy bridge. An i5-2500k (not overclocked) is euqal to, and sometimes beats an i7 6core. And if you are near the end, you cannot even overclock them. I have testet my i5 with up to 4.5GHz and it was stable. So in case there might be a bottleneck somewhere in the future, i know that i just have to overclock from 4 to 4.5GHz and will be finde another half year or more.

Wow, they really give you the chance to upgrade the cpu and graphics card?

LOL! Upgrade a Mac. Best joke if heared since a long time Welcome to the Mac world, upgrading = buying a new Mac for four times the money an equal pc would cost.

At least you can watch them. Fuc*ing DRM germany doesn't allow to watch it any more, because of the music >

Wow, FOV of 100° ??? Since i heard from the CRJ revival, i'm flying more often again. Mostly short flights with the MU, here standing in Munich (EDDM) for a flight to Stuttgard (EDDS). Made my own Lufthansa livery, it's up on the org. No editing.

I like the approach you made. Being able to see the pitch of the blades is a cool feature, but that it looks like someone made a video from it, just doesn't fit into a simulation. In real life you wouldn't see the blades as clear as in the sim, that's the only thing thats disturbing me. Would it be possible to make some "prerenderings" of the blades, every 50rpm or so to match the current pitch and then add this image to the prop, so you get at least a more realistic look? So lets say: until 100 rpm it is the 3D object spinning and then you transition into an image until the 3D isn't there any more. ??? Oh another question: does this plane have wingflex? For me, wingflex should be standard by now. I don't want to make it look bad, the exterior looks really nice, but that's not enough for 40 bucks. Damn the CRJ need to be out SOOOON or i will buy it, just because of eye-candy

It's not the only reason, there are a few more things i miss. And i looooove eye-candy I use the circle view a lot when i'm taking of, or landing and way more often while inflight. And most of the time when taxiing. Thats why i "hate" it, that the x737 has still a bug with its slats. Looks so ugly. : Btw, it might be the video (watched in 1080p) that still has some reduction in it, but the textures look sometimes a bit blurry, like in the last few minutes when taxiing on the nose.

Very nice video, but the props look very weird. Yeah, i read somewhere that it has to do with sync of fps and rotation of the blades, but it just look so ugly imho. Just another "not gonna buy it"-point on my list, which is sad, because i really would like to give it a try, but not in its current state. Maybe i'm got you wrong, but it just sounds like you where never able to fly a plane by using a fmc, or never had one, where the fmc worked. As if this was the first plane which does that right. :-\ Or is this only related to the AirTrack?

Will it be still possible, to type waypoints into the fmc, using the keyboard? I have bound about 70 X-Plane functions to keys, which i then either use via keyboard (FMC alphabet, numbers, change of fix/vor/ndb/airport) or bound to my X52.