FloggedHorse

Understood!! Cheers, Tim

What Boston city and KBOS scenery are you using? Pics look great!

Australia has over 600 AWS's. I have tried on the OPUS forum to prove that Australia current AWS Metar's are available but I believe OPUS responded that it wasn't in the correct format or words to that effect. The Australian Government has plenty of stations Cheryl, they just don't provide access in a format that is more suitable to your operation. As an aside, I find it fairly disappointing that you won't allow potential customers to see what Metar's they are gaining access to. I have purchased OPUS very early in the piece and find the support quite simply to be the best out there in FS world, however this aspect doesn't seem to be in line with your usual open and frank customer service. Hopefully OPUS can make contact with Airservices Australia or the BOM to come up with a method of accessing the free METAR data in a more useful format. For those interested in current Australian METAR's go to the following: http://www.bom.gov.au/aviation/observations/metar-speci/

I was thinking something along the lines of Hoppie's ACARS(http://www.hoppie.nl/acars/) to be added for VATSIM for the ACARS system, and the "ACARS style" Flightplan / Wind uplink could be used with or without VATSIM. Hoppie's ACARS can be used with TOPCATSIM's TOPCAT program and maybe even the PFPX one also (unknown by me). These are just ideas I have had for the 777 / 747 v2 that would really wind up the immersion factor. I am not a dev, nor can I code. I won't be disappointed and I won't carry on about it. I'm simply trying to help these guys make a great sim even greater. Good luck PMDG, I'm looking forward to it, whenever it will be released. Cheers, Tim

Gidday Ryan, Could the flight plan not be loaded after a nominal delay? For example I plan the route using fsbuild / pfpx and save it in the /FLTPLAN location. Instead of using a stored route loading like we could in ngx, could we request route and the code has a random delay to find and load the route? Another feature would be to request winds? I have no idea how you could implement this however it would be a neat feature to have. If any dev could do it, it would be pmdg. Looking forward to it none the less!! Regards, Tim

Is that PANC by Aerosoft? Lovely shots by the way. Really captured the mood!!

Devs,Any news regarding this?? Thanks.

Firstly, apologies about dragging an old topic up but how has AS2012 improved in this regard?WX depiction in Australia and NZ is usually quite unrealistic as a result of AS only interpolating between the major airports. Is this due to the weather sources not containing regional Aus and NZ METAR's? If so can these sources be expanded to utilise Airservices Australia METAR data? I am surprised (in ASE) every time I click on an airfield to see in the METAR remarks "interpolation" when I know that particular airfield has an automatic METAR station available.Looking forward to hearing a response from the devs of this great program.

No probs. Check your PM. I'm in no rush!!

Great shots!! How did you get the horizon to be so hazy?? Looks great especially that cockpit shot. I'll PM you if you don't mind wrt settings as I am just installing FSX myself. Well done again, FH

What mesh are you using to give 5M resolution??

Another question re sound cards? What is the best card for quality per price?

Thanks for your detailed reply Corey. I am out of the hardware game these days as I have not followed it since my last computer purchase. I am from Australia so we get ripped off for computer components in general but I will look into the system you just described. Thanks again, FH

Thanks for the reply. Price is "mates rates" if you know what I mean!!

Looking at a new system for a mate. He is offloading this and I am in the market. What is everyones thoughts on the following combo? Intel i7 950 overclocked to 4.2gHzGigabyte X58A-UD3R motherboardG.Skill 1600MhZ DDR3 RAM – 12gb 2 x G.Skill Phoenix Pro 120gb SSD Hard DrivesNVIDIA GeForce GTX480 video cardNoctua NH-D14 CPU cooler Cheers, FH

KRNT Renton. It is says it a the file name of the photo. Well done!!

Your speculation is partly incorrect. I doubt your theory of "Whatever the IAS" would wash with many military pilots. Here are some thoughts I have regarding the difference of the two approachs to final approach management:Speed and alpha directly linked together as a function of angle of bank and weight. After all the wing must produce enough lift to balance the weight in the various configs and attitudes. Basic aerody theory here. Fast jet aircraft often recover in formations and recovering a high voulme of aircraft to an airfield is of utmost importance. So tight circuits is the order of the day. Tight circuits results in higher angles of bank to get around base. Up to 60 degrees of bank can be used whereas a Boeing or Airbus type would rarely use more than 30 degrees of bank. Fighter aircraft are often much more sensitive to changes in alpha as they have a more aggresive (thinner) aerofoil to deal with supersonic flight. They are also reasonably light in comparision to the civilian jet counterparts therefore are suffer more from changable wind / turbulent conditions. Many military jet aircraft are much more concerned about deck angle on touchdown due the fact that many are fitted with hooks for either naval ops or emergency situations. Rather then grease the jet on for passengers comfort many fighters simply reduce the rate of D enough to place the gear within limits and get the wheels on the commence braking. Fighters are too light to carry heavy deuty brake units around and most do not have reverse thrust / spoilers (although some do). As a result of all of this it is important to land at the correct alpha as this will result in ideal cable parameters and as alpha and speed are linked (via angle of bank and weight) the correct approach speeds will be attained.In practice the two circuits flown are vastly different however with the same result. To see it in practice, open your 747 and fly a tight circuit utilising the auto-throttle. Have the velocity vector on your PFD also. Dial in Vref plus additives and watch carefully how the attitude and velocity change around base whilst maintaining the same speed. The attitude will also 'raise' towards the pitch limit bars (yellow bars on PFD). Now to fly the way a fighter would simply fly another circuit (all manually this time) holding a constant alpha. You will note the speed will increase around base and angle of bank is introduced and the attitude will hold constant with reference to the pitch limits bars. Much more throttle manipulation is required in this case also. No person here was claiming either method inferior Subs was simply pondering the difference. Hopefully my rambling here will point out some key differences. Both methods result in safe landings and that is goal!!!Tim