VirtualAviator

Thanks for the update.

Hi @TimV, FYI - TorqueSim has a vendor support forum here: https://forums.x-pilot.com/forums/forum/258-entegra-sr20/. You really didn't provide enough information to get real help. All you'd get, if anything, would be guesses. If you do ask your question in the forum above, be sure to upload and include your log.txt file. The log.txt file can be found in the same folder as xplane.exe.

Yeap, I'm definitely watching the Ejets. Mark7 is great. I really like him. I really hope the 560XL get its due. He's releasing an update soon. I plan to circle back and check out the airplane again.

In my latest escapades, I've acquired a new aircraft and have been getting checked out in it. it is the Maule M7 by VFlyteAir. I've also been working on renewing my type-rating for the King Air 350 and the Cirrus SR22 Integra, which were recently release for XP12. Finally, I been working on getting type-rated in the ZIBO. I've acquired the 737-300 a few days ago. I've yet to install it in XP11. It sounds like the XP12 version will come online soon. Fingers crossed. Since I've recently expanded my flying to include charter and airline operations, I'm looking at what else might be dropping for regional jets for XP12. Kinda keeping an eye out for what's coming.

I bought the SR22 Entegra for its avionics. Too many devs stuff LR's G1000 into their planes. Some even tweak it. I've come to realize that emulating an full avionics suite is such a heavy lift and, that it improbable that many devs will step up to the challenge. Perhaps somebody will began developing h-fidelity drop-in avionics. Then devs could drop it into their offerings. The PC-12 uses the Honeywell Apex Primus Suite. No one has stepped up to modeling it. By extension, there are no PC-12NGs or PC24s or any aircraft that uses that suite exclusively. Your thoughts on "study-level" reminds me of JRR Toiken's thoughts on Good morning in the book, The Hobbit. I'm hoping study level means your third option. As long as you disclose that the intent is for simulation only I don't think you'll have any problems with legality. Of course, that's wishful thinking, albeit the Hot Start Challenger fits. Foxtrot Alpha, a real-world veteran Challenger pilot says he personally knows of pilots who've used the Hot Start 650 as a supplement to help get their type-rating for that aircraft. Perhaps one day, more simulation aircraft will be as thorough. Can you imagine paying $100 to $300 for true [quote] study-level [unquote] add-ons? I agree whole-heartedly with your sentiment on the Moo. It's really a different beast. I can hardly wait to get my paws on the XP12 version.

@Rick310 Do you have any of Aerobask's Diamonds? The DA42, DA50 and DA62 has deicing. The DA50 is FAA (United State Federal Aviation Administration) FIKI certified. I believe the DA62 is also. Not sure about the DA42 but it has deicing too.

I recently dropped a video on the Citation 560XL. I pulled no punches. I think it's a great airplane and the developer did a great job. He simply over priced it. I get why: that's his baby. Perhaps, in his mind this aircraft is the best biz jet, (barring the CL650) ever made. He may even have thought that at the cost it's under priced. I like the developer. He's respectful, even in the face of harsh criticism. What I don't like is that he respectfully dismisses criticism rather than learning from feedback. Nevertheless, I do enjoy the plane - even if it is over priced, IMO.

VNKT - Kathmandu, Nepal and VQPR - Paro, Bhutan both checks the interesting box. Neither is particularly a challenge for piston and turboprops but can pose real challenges for major airlines; I believe only 8 pilots in the world are authorized to fly large airliners into Paro. The shear beauty of the scenery makes these airports worth the trip, imo. In the US, The IFR approach to (KASE) Aspen, Co. is considered medium challenging. KTEX - Telluride, Co. at over 9000' MSL is just plain fun.

I suppose I'll upgrade or change over to the Gizmo64.plugin pair once my XP12 aircraft are converted. I suspect there will be an installer that will deprecate and replace Gizmo (the current version)? If not, manually changing is straightforward. It may not be straightforward for all X-Plane users, however.

I've seen the TV series. There was a time when I was obsessed with AK. I still love that state. I've never had an interest in airliners -- I'm trying to develop an interest now. When I started back simming in 2017 my reasoning and goal was to resume training for my PPL. For the first 16 months or so I would only fly aircraft I thought I might fly IRL. That was basically the C152, C172, and the PA28 series or Pipers. Due to medical issues - a back that requires strong pain meds - I am grounded as PIC. So now I fly whatever suits my fancy. I want to fly IXEG's 737 so I've been learning to fly the ZIBO. I realize IXEG's offering is more analog than the ZIBO. FWIW, I like your realism plan. Hopefully, PropStrike Studio (or someone) will convert his Canada and AK scenery to XP12. I'd love to revisit Machmell and Quamtum River.

Perhaps you could fly there in the winter if you flew VFR days only? Just say'n.

I didn't know that. Looking into it now. Thanks!

I run add-ons. However, I restrict them to those that have been tested and rated for XP12. There simply no way I could enjoy a vanilla sim. I enjoy my aircraft addons so I run Gizmo and other scripting add-ons as needed. I love my ortho, X-Camera, Traffic Global, Real Sim Gear 500, and other add-ons like the PilotEdge plugin and Xpilot for Vatsim. If any of these are causing an occasional CTD than the inconvenience is worth it. The only plugin that I know has caused CTDs so far is TG or Traffic Global. Then there's Spad.neXt for my external hardware. Making X-Plane as immersive as possible is almost a hobby within the hobby. For me, I couldn't imagine running XP12 out of the box with only the default aircraft. So I say, live and let live. We all have our own expectations for simming and mine doesn't invalidate anyone's expectations and vice-versa. I enjoy simming so much that I hang out in these forums and look for opportunities to share and give back.

Flight simulation can be frustrating. Frustration is one of the reasons I could never gasp the other flight simulator. Nevertheless, for good or bad, I made the choice to use XP12 as my primary sim. At one point, I could hardly complete a flight due to sim crashes. For the most part, the crashes have subsided - although yesterday it crashed during a video recording 3/5th through a flight. It does appear that LR is accepting the auto-generated crash reports. For the most part, I am enjoying XP12 immensely. I miss some of the aircraft that has been promised via upgrades to XP12. I've come to accept that so far, XP12 has been a slog for LR. We all wanted it to be a sprint. I'm sticking with XP12 because I believe in the end the pains and delays will be worth it. I would rather the LR and 3rd party developers take the time to get XP12 right than to make the time to fix mistake due to rushing. You are smart, @scooke7 to remain with XP11 until XP12 matures a bit more. XP12, in its current offering, can be extremely taxing, especially in class C and class B airspace. Yes, there is work to be done in XP12, but I'm confident the work is being done. As I said, I am enjoying XP12. There's no better feeling than to simulator a flight from planning and preflight to landing and shutdown in either version.

I purchased the Cessna Citation XL560 for XP12 for $60.00. The dev says the aircraft is "study level". Hmmm. I can say the aircraft is different. There are hidden gems that prevent the aircraft from starting until you discover them. I found this extremely frustrating. The dev says, in bold text, READ THE POH. Personally, I found the POH just as frustrating, TL;DR on steriods. What I can say about the aircraft is that I believe the dev put a lot of time and effort into the aircraft. It's actually not bad once you get past the POH and quirks. However, I think he took quite a bit of liberties (i.e. you can't remove covers unless the aircraft engines start up) in a number of areas. I plan to post a video on the aircraft soon. As for study level, hmmm... doesn't meet my definition of a study-level airplane.

Agreed. I think our virtual hangers look alike. I have the same aircraft except for the FJS Q400 and the TB10 & 20. I can fly everyone of them OK but none of them well. My sim friends keep saying I should focus on 1 aircraft. It's people like me who devs love. I'm going to buy and fly it at least once. Sheesh! No wonder this hobby is expensive for me. Still looking forward to the IXEG 733 (new purchase) and the MU-2 Marquise (upgrade).

Makes sense. Right now, the Maule M-7 s the only native XP12 STOL plane I own, aside from the default aircraft. I have a lot of STOL aircraft in XP11. Kudos about the devs.

I'm hoping to start a conversation on what is "Study Level". Depending on who you ask it seems to be a moving target. Technically, I suppose any aircraft that is modeled close enough to the real world counterpart to teach you something about one or more of its systems could be considered study level. One of my personal pet-peeds is when a aircraft is called study level but doesn't model the breakers. For me, pulling breakers can reveal a lot about an airplane's systems.

Admittedly, I haven't read it anywhere. Also I said, "I don't think..." Of course, nothing is carved in stone and there are exceptions to almost every rule. For the most part, no one is developing for XP11. I think there are few devs who might provide a patch or two. I'm not saying or implying that anyone should stop enjoying XP11. It's a great sim. Me, personally, I have a bunch of aircraft that if I want to fly I have to load up 11.

I don't think anyone is developing for X-Plane 11 anymore. It has reached its pinnacle.

Personally, I was only impressed with Carenado's aircraft when I first started (back) simming with XP in 2017. Didn't take me long to figure out that most of their aircraft was light on systems modeling. However, the texture modeling is what sold me. If Carenado want to avoid XP, I say, "good rid...". Turns out that some of the guys from Thranda has done work for both Just Flight and Carenado.

Enjoy the journey. The destination ain't moving.

I don't think so. However, there is a support forum on the ORG website. I only visit that site when I need support not available elsewhere. To that end, there is also an email support system available directly the Airfoillabs website.

May you live long and recover lost health. Hope you're still simming at 99.

I've purchased a ton of aircraft. I'm one of those guys who loves flying a variety of aircraft. However, I want good and decent aircraft if I'm paying for it. I still have a bunch of airplanes that needs upgrading to XP12. Am I willing to pay for my upgrades? The answer isn't that straightforward. Here is why. If I recently purchased an XP11 aircraft, say within the last 6 months, I absolutely expect a free upgrade and any attempts to charge for it will seem and feel like a money-grab by the developer. Likewise, any aircraft that receives only a minimal amount of tweaks (i.e. rain effects and performance tweaks) ought to be free, my opinion. Aircraft that get substantial rewrites and/or new features should come at some price to the user. I can't always discern which category an upgraded aircraft falls in. Here is an anecdotal example I recently encountered. I have the XP11 version of the KingAir 350. The developer charged me for the upgrade to XP12, and they gave me a 40% discount off the $50 purchase price. This dev has a reputation for producing good and decent aircraft with fidelity. The marketing blurb mentioned a host of new features. Since I trust the developer, I paid without concern. I expect this developer earned the premium and that it's a win for both of us (I'll let you know if I later feel otherwise). I have been watching IXEG redevelop the Boeing 737 for XP12. At this point, I think they deserve every dollar being charged, and yes, they are changing for the upgrade - but that debate is beyond this post. I want to give them my money because they've kept me in the loop. I have some idea of how much additional work they have put into the upgrade. I have not followed the redevelopment of the King Air. I was reluctant to pay the upgrade fee. Then I thought: if they've spent half as much time and energy as IXEG they've earned my money. The point is, it is important to communicate with customers to justify charging again for the same aircraft. It is especially true if you don't have a reputation for high-fidelity aircraft.