VirtualGAaviator

XP has a similar option. I believe it's Ctr-Shift-E. I wouldn't say that X-Plane has fallen out of the picture. Laminar Research and Microsoft is a classic David and Goliath story (IMO). David may appear to be beaten down but the story isn't over. I think David is looking for it's niche. I think it's trying to find something that Goliath can't easily match. I'm hoping and believing that it'll be the fidelity of it's aircraft. That is why the Hot Starts, IXEGs, and perhaps even the RealSimGears (RSG is a relative newcomer to aircraft, but WOW! their DA40NG is simply wonderful) of the world are so important. Those that push the envelop in aircraft fidelity will ensure David maintains a place in the arena. HOWEVER (there's always a however, right?), This is software we're talking about. Goliath was built on software and can throw resources at matching David's blows. What gets my goat to stumping is that Goliath has this huge roadmap of things it needs to fix. Stuff that was promised at launch still hasn't come to pass. Now they have the gall to announce a new version as if the existing version is stable. And folks are salivating for the new version - problems with the old version be damned. I just don't get it. X-Plane foreever!

I get it. I was the same way. My plan was to let the sim be my time for relaxing and enjoyment. As a matter of course, I'd learn the basics. In fact, learning the basics was a lot of fun. What I didn't want was for the sim to become work and a source of frustration. Over the past few months that's exactly what it had become. That's because I am trying to transition into airliners. The Zibo flies just like the C172. It's the other crap that's frustrating and requires some degree of study. Learning to program the FMS - which I tackled because I wanted to fly the CL650. Learning to read charts, and follow SIDS and STARS. On top of that, managing the radios during the periods of high work loads. However, cruise is the most boring thing in the world in airliners. I can see why sim pilots who've mastered Airliners enjoy it so much. If you can accomplish a real point to point flight and everything goes just like you planned it has to be a great feeling of reward. I'm trying to get there. At this point I can, at least start the engines on the ZIBO . I do intend to fly the 737-300 which is currently under redevelopment. That's my motivation for learning an airliner. BTW - the frustrations are subsiding and slowly being replaced with enjoyment and reward.

I have all three sims. Rarely do I fly XP11 or MSFS. All three are here for our enjoyment, right? Just a matter of taste. As far as XP12 goes, I would surmise that everyone involved in the project, whether you are: 1) A part of Laminar, 2) A 3rd party dev. or, 3) an end user, are feeling the frustrations from the delays. Those in development, at all levels, I believe are working as hard and fast as they can. As for LR, I suppose getting the code to be forward leaning and backwards compatible is turning out to be tougher than they originally thought. 3rd Party devs gotta eat and catching food gets a lot tougher when you can't get your products out or they aren't selling because the way the code behaves - causes stuff to break. Finally, if you're you or me then it gets harder and harder to understand why the hell is it taking so long to roll out my beloved aircraft? You might even be starting to wonder if it's worth sticking with X-Plane 12. You know you can't go back to XP11 and the thought of flying full-time in the other sim leaves a bad taste in your mouth. So all you, as an end user, can do is tie a rope and hang on. I know this doesn't apply to those who're perfectly content with XP11. But for the rest of us all I can say is, "hang in there".

I think so too. What pissed me off was that I couldn't follow the instructions. I should have been able to. I still need to brush-up on radials and bearings. Need to get out of my comfort zone. *sigh*

I never really talked to ATC in real life. I did make CTAF calls. My CFI handled ATC. I would have eventually had I continued training. I am interested in a virtual ATC network. I have a current Pilotedge (PE) subscription and, a Vatsim account. My issue was that I stop progressing. I got to a point where I was comfortable with PE, flying to the same airports over and over in the ZLA area. Being a VFR pilot, I didn't push myself to practice IFR flying and procedures. I even got the feeling that the PE controllers grow tired of handling my usual calls and request for flight following. I really quit when I was flying VFR with flight following to a small airport just outside of Las Vegas. The controller advised me that I was in violation of airspace when I flew over a Military Operations Area (MOA). I'd flown the route numerous times with flight following in the past. As I was arriving into the Vegas area he asked vectored me to a heading to avoid traffic. I began to panic. Although I'd been vectored before to avoid traffic, I was caught totally off guard. He told me to turn 10 degrees to the left. I was more used to something like fly heading 340 to avoid traffic. Then he told me to join the Boulder VOR on an outbound radius. What? huh? After the 3rd request to comply, I said unable, that I was having some issue with my avionics (which I wasn't) and I cancelled flight following. I got really mad at the controller. Then I realized that I was the blame and I got mad with myself for not being able to follow those instructions. I realized it wasn't the controller. It was me. All those years flying PE and I couldn't fly outbound on a VOR radius. Ever since then I get terribly intimidated by ATC. So I avoid networks yet, I keep telling myself that I'm going to restart. That's why I keep my PE subscription current and I occasionally fly Vatsim. Never IFR though. So yes, I am interested in ATC and I do intend to work through my fear. It's just that it's easier to do it tomorrow than today (wow! a catchline, right?). Hey man, you don't have to give Volanta a try. But if you did, I think you'd like it. It works in tandem with ATC networks.

Volanta does not offer ATC. Orbix calls it a personal flight log. That's a good description, IMO. https://volanta.app/

I've been using Volanta almost since day 1. However, I never associated it with a VA. Other than the flight sim ACARS there is little in common with a VA. I always thought that one of the many reasons for a VA was to be accountable, albeit not to anyone particularly, but perhaps to others in the VA. BTW: Volanta is great. If you haven't tried it you're missing a lot.

One of the guys I talked to flew the MD11. I gotta say, it surprising what I learn at these meetings. I learned the 717 is basically an upgrade to the MD11. It sparked a conversation among a couple of retired airline pilots. It was so interesting hearing some of the shenanigans they dealt with on the B732, B733 and, B734. Also what was interesting is their lack of appreciation of what is involved with modeling an aircraft for flight simulation. My challenge turned out to be why a dev would need access to someone who has access to the 717. They'd pull up stuff on the internet and say, everything they [devs] need is already on the internet. I hope I gave them some awareness of the level of authenticity today's flight sims possess and why it's important to have a 1st person source. Anyhoo, it was a fun conversation the 717 sparked. Thanks @tkyler.

There's actually a difference in the way the airplane handles - i.e. cloud turbulence, and the flight physics has been tweaked. There's a difference in light rendering too. I don't mean to hi-jack this thread so in the spirit of the thread's title, should we start a new thread if you guys want to reply?

I'm going to my EAA Chapter meeting tomorrow morning. I'll check around there for some with access to a 717. If I get a hit I'll PM you.

This may be a little off subject, but wouldn't it move future aircraft development further faster is a group was formed to create avionics or flight management systems, where the core could be reused in different aircraft? It seems to me that every dev is having to reinvent the wheel. I sorta imagine a voluntary group creating core products that would be open-source. Anyway, I'm just spit-balling here.

Glad you figured it out. Simming and real-life flying is becoming more and more asymptote.

To be honest, @daemotron, I wasn't around during the transition from XP9 to XP10. I popped in right at XP11.1 (I still remember clouds "scissoring" by as I flew through them). I did read somewhere that the transition from XP10 to XP11 was more straightforward. Thank you for letting me (us) know that it was traditionally just as messy. That gives me more confident in the product. I find myself wondering if LR devs are working 8-12 hours per day, like madmen on a mission, on XP12 or, if each dev is causally working on their respective parts a few hours per week. I guess I'll never know, but I'd like to assume the former.

You didn't. Remember, "A good (sim) pilot is always learning". My rant/blub wasn't intended for you personally, although I did preface with your name. I tend to imagine a great deal of folks reading through some of these post and thus learn something (or at least entertain another opinion). Since simming is the only thing I spend money on, I tend to go for it. I don't drink or smoke so I consider this my vice. That's why I'm quick to pickup sim stuff. House is paid for, kid is grown and gone, oh yeah... no wife. Nevertheless, this isn;t about how many aircraft we have, or who can afford this or that. It's about a passion, learning and most of all, having fun. So no, I don't think you are tasting your leathery foot.

Rick, I think most 3 party devs are more frustrated than we are with the changes LR has made to XP12 - pray-tell it'll be worth the pain in the end. Many were promising free upgrades from XP11 to XP12. The upgrade from XP10 to XP11 was straightforward, from what I've heard. The upgrade to XP12 is bumpy and curvy. The devs didn't anticipate the guts of the sim to be as radically different from XP11 as it turned out. In fact, many thought they'd be able to have the XP12 versions of their aircraft deployed within days. At this point, it is going on months and we're still waiting on some aircraft. The good news is that most GA aircraft that rely on LR's G430, G530 and G1000 were able to get released relatively quickly. More complex aircraft seem to have be rewritten. I've been following the progress of the 737-300 by IXEG and have recently started reading a blog by X-Crafts. Both have given examples of how something that seemly should have taken a day or so to do, turned into weeks. The difference is that one developer has chosen to release his product in a "good enough" state with known bugs and a commitment to fix them, while the other has chosen to squash as many bugs as possible before releasing it. I'm waiting on my beloved TBM900. Since I haven't been following the redevelopment of the airplane, it's easy to assume that the dev has moved on or just taking his sweet time. However, I know better. Many devs have multiple offerings and limited time and resources. After flying a rushed plane, I've decided that I'd rather be patient than to rush them. The question whether to charge for the XP12 version is a tough one. I can see why it's hard to just give away, for free, months and months of reworking logic, and testing code (only to have the sim change and break the code and have to start again). Tools like Planemaker won't cut (alone) it in today's simming environment. Planemaker, IMO, is a great learning tool for someone who's getting started and want to make a cartoonish looking airplane with default datarefs and, drop-in avionics... but what do I know? I'm not a dev. Complex aircraft require complex programming logic and rigorous testing. I, for one, don't mind paying a dev for their work if it delivers the value I crave, even if it means paying for an aircraft twice (within reason).

Just out of curiosity, would you say that the changes to the XP12 code and SDK is settling down, and stabilizing or are you still seeing wild swings that may break something you've spent days or weeks on?

AFAIK, most issues concern the autopilot and/or power thrust levels. Of course, stuff like windshield effects won't work. Nevertheless, I think almost all the planes will fly. Some might cause CTDs. The more I read 3rd party devs blogs the more I'm learning that XP12 is a vastly different beast than XP11. At the end of the day, it's entirely up to each user whether they want to fly XP11 aircraft in XP12.

OMG. 324 is a lot. That's more than I have even if I check the show earlier version box. If I were to move my XP11 aircraft over, I'd run a close 2nd, no doubt. . However, I only run XP12 native aircraft.

WOW! Let's form XAA - X-Plane Aircraft Anonymous.

Speaking of flying a single airplane, one of the problems I have is that I'll start my sim, get the virtual hanger page and stare. I have a plethora of airplanes to fly. What do I feel like today? hmmm.... (tick-tock, tick-tock) hmmm. Oh well, I'll fly tomorrow.

Start flying.py View File Start flying.py is a simple program launcher that is somewhat more powerful than creating a batch file. If you launch other addons to run with your flight simulator this utility is for you. Set it up once and then you'll launch your Flight Simulator and addons with a single click. Submitter VirtualGAaviator Submitted 05/30/2023 Category Plugins and Utilities  

I'm with you, Bro. Although, I'd love to see the NG(X), I'd settle for the legacy model with deep systems. I've only purchased 2 airplanes for MSFS and Carenado's PC-12 was one of 'em. It wasn't much better than the XP11 version. The only other airplane I might purchase for MSFS is the PC-12 when SimWorks release their version (they've been working on it for almost 2 years - I think). That's how much I love the PC-12. The JF Arrow III/V was the other MSFS purchase. Cool cockpit pic, btw.

I can't recall having that issue with my copy. Here's a quick landing. Carenado's version was so lacking that I purchased and flew the STMA version mostly. The STMA version was ported from XP10 and the graphics where never updated. However, the systems were modeled much deeper than Carenado' version. The STMA version looked much more cartoonish, though.

That's only 1667 flight per year, averaged. Or about 4 1/2 flights per day, everyday, 7 days per week. Nah. You're not addicted.