dainja556

I believe that high-torque aircraft sometimes have airframes built to fly against the torque via very minor design asymmetry. Something like that might be difficult to build into the X-Plane flight model.

Wasn't intended to. I'm not referring to the blank PFD. About that, though, it sounds to me like Carenado released a product that, when you use the platform they chose and claimed compatibility with, results in problems. Regardless of the technical source of the problem, If they're going to claim that the plane works on that version of X-Plane and on that platform, perhaps that should have been verified prior to shipping it. If there were good quality control measures in place, perhaps that incompatibility would have been discovered and it could have been disclosed to potential buyers. I don't know that much about the blank PFD problem though, I haven't looked into it much. That's not what I was referring to, though. What I'm referring to is the myriad of problems that the Carenado planes have when they're released. All of them things that would have been caught if there was decent quality control. Just off the top of my head: the Cessna 208 missing a hand on the altimeter, the transponder light not working, the engine response being a large departure from reality. Some other recent plane having a compass that rolled over at something other than 360, turn coordinator broken, transponder dial not functional. These are all things that were present upon release. These were all things that could have been found by a little bit of flight testing. If they're missing such obvious things, it really makes me wonder how much effort is put into the behind he scenes stuff. Are they just bringing the model and textures over, making the gauges work, slapping together a flight model, and shipping it? Their support is great. They seem to get issues fixed pretty quickly once a customer points them out. But why are customers the ones to discover all of these really obvious screw ups?

I seriously wonder if there is any quality control element at all with the Carenado planes being released on X-Plane.

By default, B or V.

What did you use for the photo scenery?

Yea, I'm really eyeing that 337 as well. Looks great.

Hahaha, I saw that larjeet!

You're kidding! That sucks! It was looking awesome. I was happy to see a midwestern airport getting worked on. Nebraskan here

The P180 is one of my favorite planes. Thanks for taking this on! There was a guy that spent a lot of time upgrading the performance of the P180 for XP9 and wrote an awesome manual for it all. http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=9572 Would love to have the same level of performance tuning for the one in XP10!

Your computer is fine. All three of those aircraft are available.

Thanks for the quick reply.

Can someone explain how the DRM packaged with this aircraft works, what restrictions it places, what will cause it to lock you out. Considering the purchase of this aircraft, but I want to know what I'm getting into.

Flash has its advantages. If the browser supports flash, you know exactly how the interface is going to appear to them. It either shows up exactly as it's designed, or it doesn't show up. You have a LOT of control over the experience. Javascript, HTML variants, and CSS don't provide consistency between browsers like Flash does. Each scripting and rendering engine can interpret the code differently. It takes a LOT of work to get stuff to look and perform the same across the many different browsers (and their many versions). It's a mess. Developers don't expect complex designs to work for everyone... they just hack it enough that it works on the major versions and try to limit the number of visitors they exclude. How integral Flash is to the site depends on the content of the site. Artistic sites (the website of a band, for instance) can get away with deploying a website that's entirely Flash-based. They benefit from the interactive, multimedia driven interface. An informational website (Wikipedia, for example) should stay away from a site design that depends heavily on Flash, especially for site navigation and other essentials. So yes, Flash is just as current as other technologies. DHTML/JS is not a replacement for Flash. They have different entirely different capabilities and limitations. Apple is stupid for not trying to bring it to their devices.

LOL! Maybe it's your phone that needs to 'get with the times'. Flash is everywhere.

I've never tried it myself, but I know of several folks that have and ended up leaving it for FSEconomy (which is free, and much more social).

Yea, I think that last one's the best yet!

Sorry. Cool X-Pilot paints are reserved only for Org payware.. haha! Looking forward to that paint. I'll definitely wear it when I'm flying the BK117 of FSEconomy.

Yep, that's exactly what I was talking about. Makes it tiger-ish. Great job on the paints!

The only thing I might recommend is that the x-pilot logo be on a white background so it doesn't look like a bumper sticker. Maybe the lowest orange area could be white instead. Just what's contained by the black stripes, where the x-pilot.com logo is. I'm just nitpicking though, it's a great paint! Good work.

Man, you're really gettin good at painting that thing.

Hmm.. lacks Bittorrent. I ran across http://burnbit.com/ the other day. Creates a .torrent that includes the HTTP source as a seed, so supporting clients will be able to supplement the download with peers if they exist, but won't be dead in the water if they don't. Makes nice little download buttons too. Hehehe The interface is nice, but personally I'd like it to use however much screen there is available instead of being limited in width. That's just personal preference. It seems like the interface lends itself well sub-categories and sub-items. I'd like to see liveries fall underneath the aircraft they are for, instead of being a separate category all lumped together. It'll make it a lot easier to browse through them. It's better than searching for them, and hoping your keywords are formatted the same as the livery author. I put "Dreamfoil 206", he puts "B206". I don't know how this would work in to what you have--it's not a critique as much as it is an idea--but I'd like to be able to rely on text searches as little as possible. It'd be neat if the structure allowed for a section/group/whatever for each model, and if there are different uploads for it they'll all be together. I don't know how many times someone's mentioned a freeware whatever, and I downloaded it only to find out months later that there was a newer, nicer one available from some other author. So the structure would be Aircraft --G/A --Cessna --172 o 172N by ThisGuy o 172RG by OTherGuy --Piper --PA38 This kind of structure has issues, though. You can't possibly deploy this with everything make/model/trim built in. Users would have to be able to create ones that don't exist. Users suck at putting in nice data, so there would probably need to be some level of moderation/cleanup. It seems like things on the web are moving away from this strictly structured stuff, and more towards (as you mentioned) tagging and things of that nature. That's probably for good reason (where do you put a Schweizer 300, under Hughes, Schweizer, or Sikorsky?) So I don't know if this would work with what you have visualized for the download manager. I just know it'd be really nice to have similar aircraft together, instead of all dropped into one 50 page long heap. Text searches work, but minor differences in spelling and syntax can throw them off. Maybe tagging should be the process by which users describe their aircraft, but the aircraft are displayed in a structured manner. For instance, the user tags his Schweizer with "Schweizer", "Hughes", AND "Sikorsky". When the list is displayed for browsing, the aircraft shows up under all three. In the end, I think that having a neat and organized file library is going to require some light moderation. One way to help would be to (passively) encourage users to look for tags that already exists. A lot of tagging interfaces give you a textbox to type whatever in. If an identical tag matches, it adds the tag, otherwise it creates a new one. Creating new tags should take a few steps. We don't need a "Piper" tag and a "Piper Aircraft" tag. Just some ideas. I don't really know what I'm talking about.

Woohoo, I win! Great lookin model so far!

I notice that this has an installer. Is there something complicated about the scenery that would require this, or is it just for convenience. Are there any files installed outside of the X-Plane folder? I've been holding off on RealScenery for a long time because I couldn't bring myself to spend so much on scenery for one state, but I think I might give this one a shot.

My best guess is a Lancair Legacy.

bad joke. especially with the nuclear crisis in japan going on. :-\ Stop being overly sensitive. I'm sure nobody thought that until you said it.