Microsoft Flight Sim 2020

[Hoots]

3 minutes ago, Diggun said:

Agreed! Fate Is the Hunter is one of the finest books on flying ever written, and really made me think differently about those guys!

Just re-reading that one now. Brilliant book. 
 

[ZachariasX]

43 minutes ago, Diggun said:

Agreed! Fate Is the Hunter is one of the finest books on flying ever written, and really made me think differently about those guys!

Yes, I have read it as well. Brilliant.

[Diggun]

I'm starting to think I need to pull the trigger on purchasing MSFS 2020. I'm frankly scared how long 150GB will take to download on my modest internet though. Sure does look purdy though....

[Hoots]

22 minutes ago, Diggun said:

I'm starting to think I need to pull the trigger on purchasing MSFS 2020. I'm frankly scared how long 150GB will take to download on my modest internet though. Sure does look purdy though....

It is, and depending on your views I think the airframe content will only get better. You only have to download it once...

[Feathered_IV]

36 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

I hope you've allowed for the crosswind, Feathered_IV. If you haven't you should reach PNG eventually, but not where you intended...

 

 

EDIT: 

" I set out at around 8:50am on a course of 028 degrees"? According to Little Navmap, the course from Lizard Island to Port Moresby is 012 degrees magnetic.

 

Well that explains a lot 

 

Three and a half hours later I finally saw dry land...

 

 

 

Not quite sure where I had hit the coast, I turned right to follow it along as there seemed to be some identifiable bay area down there.

 

 

I couldn't make the area fit my rather sketchy map outline on the ipad which was balanced on my knee.  However I began to worry that I was looking at something right down near Milne Bay.  Terrifying thought.  

Uncertain and increasingly nervous about my petrol state, I turned back the other way and headed up the coast to the northwest.  After about 25 minutes I saw a raggedy looking airstrip and decided to drop in for a bit of a sit and a think.

 

 

Nobody home.  No buildings or even roads in the vicinity.  I'd promised myself that if there was some kind of facilities here I could have legitimately topped up the tanks and asked the way. 

 

Then I remembered the radio...  

 

I'd never even used it before.  If there was one thing I've been repeatedly told in the last ten years of modern flight sims, its that asking anything of the controller is not possible, and things are just way too "advanced" now for such magical features.  Nevertheless, I found the ATC menu and was able to muddle my way through its many features.  Eventually I was able to contact Moresby directly and ask for a relative heading.   A rather attractive female voice informed me of the heading to Jackson field and a distance of... Ninety Five Miles!  

 

Gordon Bennet.

 

Well I couldn't stay where I was.  I'd have to give it a try.  I got back in the air and set a very modest pace to try and conserve what fuel remained.  This time at least I had the advantage of being able to call up Moresby at regular intervals to get updated bearings.  As I got nearer though, the weather really started to close in.  I came in through a gap in the clouds and let down over the harbour.

 

 

One more call to the tower and I headed inland.  This is where it got really scary.

 

 

 

I lost my way and circled aimlessly a couple of times.  Suddenly I popped out of cloud, right over Jackson field.

 

 

Ready or not, here I come.  I wafted along with empty tanks but eventually plopped the 152 down and there I was.  The nice lady in the control tower suggested I take the next exit in the right.

 

 

Bloody hell.  What an odyssey.  I very gratefully pulled up next to a Grumman Goose with less than a gallon to spare!

 

[AndyJWest]

Well, you made it. ?

 

If the grass strip you landed on was 95 miles from Jackson field, and on the coast, it isn't shown on Little Navmap. I think you may have found an abandoned strip, or something that MSFS doesn't know about - there are lots dotted about, and PNG probably has more than most places, I suspect. 95 statute miles (83 nautical miles) would put you in the vicinity of Caper Rodney, and a Google Maps satellite image shows several clearings in the area that could conceivably be a strip. 

 

As for 'some identifiable bay', I think I've figured out where you were - see map. If it has a name, Google doesn't give it.

 

 

[Bremspropeller]

Who made that 152? The tail looks different (too tall) and the landing-gears do look well to "unloaded".

[ZachariasX]

@AndyJWest you saved my life! What an awesome tool the little navmap is! That is what I have been looking for but missing in FS2020.

[SAS_Storebror]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

Who made that 152?

Pro'lly Asobo.

 

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

The tail looks different (too tall)

Different to what?

 

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

the landing-gears do look well to "unloaded".

Sure thing... and all such gears look the same regardless wearing, plane config and fuel load.

 

FS 2020:

 

Real life:

 

Which one looks "too unloaded" now?

 

Mike

[Tektolnes]

41 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

What an awesome tool the little navmap is!

 

It's a great tool. The SIDS and STARS don't always match up between LNM and MSFS2020 as it can't read the MSFS DB yet. So if you're planning to use them it's a good idea to also have open the flight planner in MSFS to see if you can make a match before planning it all out in LNM.

 

Also just in case you haven't done it you should make sure to load the MSFS scenery library into LNM. In LNM go to Scenery Library -> Load Scenery Library and make sure the path is pointing to the correct package location. It'll take a few mins to load it all but it helps to match out airports, navaids, etc. Took me a week to figure this part out as I didn't read the instructions naturally.

[Bremspropeller]

3 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Pro'lly Asobo.

 

Different to what?

 

Sure thing... and all such gears look the same regardless wearing, plane config and fuel load.

 

FS 2020:

 

Real life:

 

Which one looks "too unloaded" now?

 

Mike

 

Do you really need that pointed out to you?

 

Actual 152 with two people:

 

Looks like I mis-remembered the tail and confused it with the 172, which has a smaller-size horn balance.

[SAS_Storebror]

2 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

Actual 152 with two people:

Fuel load? Age? Luggage?

You need to climb down form your self-proclaimed all-expert Olympus or you'll never see the full picture.

 

Mike

Edited February 3, 2021 by SAS_Storebror

[Bremspropeller]

4 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

You need to climb down form your self-proclaimed all-expert Olympus or you'll never see the full picture.

 

I have enough hours in the 152. Your service isn't required.

 

[Algy-Lacey]

32 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Real life:

 

Which one looks "too unloaded" now?

 

Mike

 

Just to point out, the photo above is skewed... stretched vertically or shrunk horizontally, you can tell because the wheels don't look round. Jus sayin

 

Here is how it should look... not so un-loaded now...

 

 

Edited February 3, 2021 by Algy-Lacey

[SAS_Storebror]

2 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

I have enough hours in the 152. Your service isn't required.

So you just posted to get it off your chest?

If you want no replies, talk to yourself in private.

If you want self-praising only, open your own forums.

If you post here, prepare for replies that are not necessarily what you wished they were. Deal with it.

 

1 hour ago, Algy-Lacey said:

Just to point out, the photo above is skewed... stretched vertically or shrunk horizontally, you can tell because the wheels don't look round. Jus sayin

 

Here is how it should look... not so un-loaded now...

Yes and no.

Yes, the original photo is skewed apparently. I simply took it from the net as-is.

No, yours isn't right either. It's skewed again, just stretched too long this time.

You tried to get the wheels round but both overdid so (see left main wheel) and forgot to take the perspective into account.

The reality looks rather like this:

 

But my Service isn't needed as I understood, so if you guys dislike the C152 and maybe FS 2020 so much, why not just put it aside and let be?

 

Mike

[Algy-Lacey]

This thread about MSFS2020 has been incredible to read, all the photo journals of far away lands. I regret commenting about that Cessna photo as I didn't mean to add fuel to the fire of a dispute, I just saw it and thought "that doesn't look right" and mentioned that the cessna didn't look underloaded when re-sized, which probably looked like I was taking the mick, not intended. I hope that we can get back to talking about the sim.

 

Happy Landings,

Biggus Dickus

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

7 minutes ago, Algy-Lacey said:

I regret commenting about that Cessna photo as I didn't mean to add fuel to the fire of a dispute, I just saw it and thought "that doesn't look right" and mentioned that the cessna didn't look underloaded when re-sized, which probably looked like I was taking the mick, not intended. I hope that we can get back to talking about the sim

 

Don't worry, it wouldn't be a true flight sim forum without personal attacks over trivial technical disagreements.

[ZachariasX]

Liberos meos, sol lucet omnibus!

 

In this sense, (thanks to @Feathered_IV) I got tempted to finally make some use of the Cessna 152. In the proper setting of course. Some PTO feeling, the Solomon flavor. From Henderson Field (AGGH) to Luova Airport on Santa Cruz (AGGL).

 

 

Kind of a stretch for the 152, but you know, I have tailwinds. Yes, there's a cloud, but screenshots showed me that the 152 is armed with an artificial horizon.

 

 

Tailwinds, as said. No problemo. Just fill her to the gills.

 

 

Sooo... weather and winds were such that I couldn't do a runup on the ground as passing 1500 rpm made the aircraft skid sitting on the tarmac. The idea of the whole flight was just to fly by dead reckining and see if I manage to make landfall. For this, I wanted to fly down the islands until AGGK, where there be nothing thanopen ocean and my compass. I sometimes could see the island under me. The image above is not representative, it was mostly all grey. I hoped I could tune in on the NDB, but flying and figuring out to tune in on 370 didn't work. Chances hitting the water were worse than the benefit of getting suddenly a beacon on my instrument. And no autopilot. How unusual.

 

Passing AGGK, I turned east. I did so until I had a considerable RTI and I forgot that I wasn't on autopilot like I would have been on the Baron when leaving my chair. When I came back after a quarter of an hour, I was actually still airborne. I ventured on east, roughly 100 - 300 ft above the sea.

 

 

Land! But where's the airport?? I tried to follow the coastline as the airport should be there somewhere. But at some point I had to cheat, calling Santa Cruz and giving them my position. I did that two times and tried to get my bearings to the airport. I finally did. But the weather was so terrible I got lost twice (!) trying to fly the pattern. The first time when I tried to fly a circle above the airfield to gauge for wind and direction. Well, It was such that it blew me out of sight of the airfield after half a turn.

 

 

The 152 is a remarkable aircraft. I put it down looking out of the left side window. None of this would have been even remotely possible with the Baron.

 

 

Arrived... Safety last!

 

And now.. the beautiful litte app! Lo and Behold my track:

 

 

In principle, for some weird reason I managed to do as I envisioned it.

 

 

In more detail...

 

 

That was absolutely hair raising.

 

This sim is so much fun.

[Feathered_IV]

7 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

Well, you made it. ?

 

If the grass strip you landed on was 95 miles from Jackson field, and on the coast, it isn't shown on Little Navmap. I think you may have found an abandoned strip, or something that MSFS doesn't know about - there are lots dotted about, and PNG probably has more than most places, I suspect. 95 statute miles (83 nautical miles) would put you in the vicinity of Caper Rodney, and a Google Maps satellite image shows several clearings in the area that could conceivably be a strip. 

 

As for 'some identifiable bay', I think I've figured out where you were - see map. If it has a name, Google doesn't give it.

 

 

That’s exactly it!  What an amazing tool that is.  I will definitely have to look it up. It looks like Kupiano is where I came down, as I remember that long bay to its left. In FS2020 it is a fairly low-res scratch on the landscape with no landing marker or infrastructure. 

[Tektolnes]

Can get LittleNavMap here: Little Navmap 2.6.7 released - Little Navmap | Little Navconnect | Little Logbook Support Forum - The AVSIM Community

 

Well worth getting the extra maps that another user made - you can get google maps + sectionals for the US + some custom ones for Scandinavia as well. I like the Google -Maps-Ter one the most myself. Link is: New maps for LNM - Little Navmap | Little Navconnect | Little Logbook Support Forum - The AVSIM Community

[AndyJWest]

Jeez, I post a screenshot of the weather in the southwest Pacific, showing why I'm not flying, even with my GPS-and-autopilot XCub, and the next thing I know, the sky is full of lunatics navigating through typhoons by dead reckoning. 

 

Seriously though Little Navmap is a must, as far as I'm concerned. It is crammed full of features, fairly intuitive, and makes flight planning simple - at least for the direct-A-to-B sort of flight plan I generally follow. If you want to use it for full-procedure tubeliner planning, it'll do that too, apparently, though I've never bothered to figure all that out.

 

For after-flight analysis, Tacview works too, though as of now it doesn't have much in the way of MSFS-specific map detail. 

[Hoots]

I’ve run out of votes today but lots of posts would have one. If you think you should get one consider yourself upvoted

[Feathered_IV]

Arg.  I’ve run out of positive emojis today too.  

[AndyJWest]

1 hour ago, Feathered_IV said:

Arg.  I’ve run out of positive emojis today too.  

 

☹️ ? 

 

?

[Feathered_IV]

Oh you! ?

[Guest deleted@50488]

MFS,

 

is indeed UNIQUE !

 

I am still on my 2012 rig, i5 2500, GTX 960 4 GB gpu, 16GB DDR3 RAM, and I can run it, noticing that when I enable photogrammetry and streaming + rolling cache it runs even smoother ?

 

I really look forward for the flight dynamics and SDK updates, and the fine tunning of the Meteoblue weather feeds, but so far is the most Astounding flight simulation experience I have had in terms of scenery and weather rendering and effects ?

[Tektolnes]

Down to northern Namibia now and flying over some communal conservancies. MSFS really does this type of terrain justice with all the dried up river beds and tons of variation.

 

On next to the Etosha Pan which is a giant salt pan situated in the Etosha National Park and covers 4,800km2. Apparently home to a million flamingos but I guess they'd flown somewhere else the day I passed over.

 

 

Bit of a long leg next.. well for me anyway unlike you maniacs doing 350km+ in a 152.. so back into the CJ4 to head down to Walvis Bay, the 2nd largest city in Namibia which also apparently has lots of flamingos that I just missed that day.

 

Passing over some mountain zebra park. I saw no zebras though as the wildlife again conspired against me.

 

Then back into the Bonanza for a flight over the Ais Richtersveld Transfrontier Park on my way to Alexander Bay in the extreme north of South Africa

 

 

[DD_Arthur]

Bonkers screenies Tektolnes?

 

 

[SAS_Storebror]

4 hours ago, jcomm-in-il2 said:

fine tunning of the Meteoblue weather feeds

Rex Weatherforce really works wonders.

It's one of the three (or four, the last is actually two separate purchases) payware addons I would recommend for every FS 2020 user:

1. Rex Weatherforce
2. FS Playground
3. FS Academy VFR+IFR

Mike

[Lusekofte]

18 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Rex Weatherforce really works wonders.

It's one of the three (or four, the last is actually two separate purchases) payware addons I would recommend for every FS 2020 user:

1. Rex Weatherforce
2. FS Playground
3. FS Academy VFR+IFR

Mike

I probably Could Google that, But all these things, What do they do?

[ZachariasX]

27 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Rex Weatherforce really works wonders.

I have a mixed impression about it. When it's doing its job right, it is much better, but often enough, the results are odd. And as soon as you are outside densely populated areas (of good coverage), it is either wrong or just blue sky (if no data at all is available). What I really do like about it is that it makes the weather much more dynamic.

 

But it is not something I would recommend to anyone.

 

Also the friggin' necessity of having to run it in admin mode is not acceptable, by definition.

[SAS_Storebror]

13 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I probably Could Google that, But all these things, What do they do?

Rex Weatherforce (https://rexsimulations.com/weatherforce.html) = new METAR-based dynamic real-time weather engine

FS Playground (https://fsplayground.com/) = Among others, a replay system (currently missing in stock MSFS 2020)

FS Academy (https://www.fsacademy.co.uk/) = Flight Training Missions

 

13 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

often enough, the results are odd

Never had odd results here. Maybe your Version isn't up to date?

I've been flying around endless locations in Europe, Africa, Russia, Japan, US - the weather always precisely reflected what the next airport's METAR was, and that was - I can say so for European region only from 1st hand experience - just what it looked like when looking out of the window in real life. Quite in contrast to Stock MSFS 2020 where in the beginning it was (almost) always blue skies, and now it's some seemingly random weather, more often than not with lightning.

 

13 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

And as soon as you are outside densely populated areas (of good coverage), it is either wrong or just blue sky (if no data at all is available).

Never ever experienced anything like that.

Blue skies where there should be clouds? Never.

I've been flying in deepest darkest Africa in the middle of nowhere and the weather was perfectly right.

Simply pick the closest airport and load it's METAR. Rex will do the rest and give a smooth transition to where you are.

 

13 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

the friggin' necessity of having to run it in admin mode is not acceptable, by definition.

Being a Software Developer by profession myself, I see the issue Rex ran into:

Since the MSFS 2020 API lacks any interface to adjust weather the "official" way, Rex needs to write straight into the running MSFS 2020 processes' memory.

Since MSFS 2020 is 64 Bit, you need elevated privileges to get write access to such process (MSFS) from another process (Rex).

DLL injection might be a way out, but I'm not sure if that's feasible.

But I agree, having to run anything in admin mode always smells.

 

Mike

Edited February 5, 2021 by SAS_Storebror

[Ribbon]

Spit coming to msfs2020

https://flyingironsimulations.com/blogs/news/announcement-spitfire-mk-ixc-for-microsoft-flight-simulator

[Diggun]

Hey hivemind, any of you all get msfs 2020 from Steam? I'm having some issues. 

 

I paid my money, and was able to download the 500mb-odd initial download. This has created a desktop shot cut and I can now click 'play' in steam. However, when I do so I get the little 'thinking circle' next to my mouse pointer and then... Nada. Nothing. Not a sausage. 

 

I had a Google round, and it seems like plenty of people have had instillation issues, but can't see anyone talking about this specific one. 

 

Any thoughts, oh wise ones? 

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Never had odd results here. Maybe your Version isn't up to date?

I had it from day 1. Much has been corrected, but the current anomalies are probably due to ambigous or faulty METAR data. Still, when comparing webcam images with Weatherforce, I still get mixed results.

 

In my world tour, it has been largely useless, as does not really create larger weather systems as cyclones or Hurricanes. It is always "local weather". Comparing to what I should get according to Windy, it was not really what should be, while the inbuilt weather system matched the general picture rather well. I stopped using it.

 

Also I think METAR is not a good source to assemble an athmosphere, but it can serve to calibrate what weather should look like once you have it. Overall, there is far less info in METAR than the weather system in FS2020 uses. I think it is a bad idea ditching one for the other, especially when in principle METAR is a more limited set of data. They made a poll shortly after the first patch about what the users thought. And I wrote them just that. You cannot win against a more comprehensive system.

 

I should compare it to a flight simulator that uses just table based data to come up with flight performance. While you have nominally correct perfrmances, these are correct only for very specific conditions and "all between" is a hack one way or the other. Averaging ot is a hack as well as transitioning between sets of METAR data. So yes, calibrating lifting line theory is difficult, we see that here especially when hard data is scarce. But nobody right in their mind would ditch that for exclusively going with tables. And this is what METAR is.

 

What I would like from such a plugin is that is uses the inbuild system and tries to match that ore closely to the METAR data at hand, not ditch it. Same as fight simulators today are a mix from procedural and table data.

 

If they program it a way that would even earn them a "Win10 compatible" logo and if they could improve rather than dicrad what is in there, it would be grand.

 

4 hours ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Being a Software Developer by profession myself, I see the issue Rex ran into:

Not being a software developer, I appreciate your insight. Makes sense.

 

Yet such practise is stil rampant. ORBX being one of the worst offenders. Their idiotic store requires me to log in as admin. That screws you if you don't run your personal account as admin. I have no mercy for people daft enough to do so. What happens is the store launches as "Administrator" that is in fact a specific account on my system and it is not a sudo command to make that piece of garbage run IN MY PROFILE. The store then stores the user settings in the account "Administrator".

 

You know, I think people should be fired on the spot for much less than even considering such a way of doing things for a second. What do I get as advice? "I run my flight sim rig with no password admin accont". You know, that is just a way to spawn violent fantasies. There is just no bottom to things like that. Nothing particular to about it as REX is concerned, but outwardly unacceptable on the whole.

 

I see systemic malpracise in indeed a major feature in the evolution of software. Exceptions are rare and usually only found in projects driven by specific individials for specific reasons.

[Hoots]

Could be interesting...

 

[Guest deleted@50488]

Like gliders ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUWzyqfpJbo

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUqTzTkIZeY

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KrLKM35ioI

 

Oops, Hoots got me to it ?

 

19 hours ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Rex Weatherforce really works wonders.

It's one of the three (or four, the last is actually two separate purchases) payware addons I would recommend for every FS 2020 user:

1. Rex Weatherforce
2. FS Playground
3. FS Academy VFR+IFR

Mike

 

I honestly miss Active Sky, and they having been left out, until for now, is quite a disappointment ?

Been a  long time beta tester with HiFi, all platforms, and they really do a remarkable job in FSX, P3D and even XP...

 

Unfortunately METAR-based approaches are never going to work that nice with MFS IMO, given the way they will have to merge with model data...

 

Let's hope ASOBO changes their plans...

Edited February 5, 2021 by jcomm-in-il2

[Bremspropeller]

18 minutes ago, Hoots said:

Could be interesting...

 

 

Looks very nice, but they'll have to fine-tune the winch-behaviour.

No glider will go that fast on the ground that quickly. 180kph (that's roughly 100kts) is way overspeeding the airplane.

 

Let's see where this is going. if they get the glider-dynamics right, they could really eat Condor's lunch.

 

[ZachariasX]

7 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

Looks very nice, but they'll have to fine-tune the winch-behaviour.

No glider will go that fast on the ground that quickly. 180kph (that's roughly 100kts) is way overspeeding the airplane.

So far, they simulated a JATO and not a winch. Too flat, too fast, too quick.

 

But it would be nice if they could draw the rope and the winch as well. And maybe a tug plane as well that follows a customizable path. There is enormous potential.

 

But so far, I haven‘t really seen thermals in FS2020. Most is dynamic dependent on the relief. It would be a geme changer if those „hot air bubbles“ could be simulated. Or... what is „Wellenwolken“ in English? Those things along with what causes them.

 

There is so much to air...

[ZachariasX]

Here's my issue with Weather Force:

 

That is webcam weather, right now on LSZH from the midfield dock looking north:

 

This is the default "live" weather, looking in the same general direction:ther in FS2020:

 

And this is what Weather Force parses from it:

EDIT: Yes, Injection complete!

 

The problem here is that we do have some warm front systems moving about, while it is actualyl rather nice weather just looking up in the sky right now.

 

This is enough to produce some cloud  and haze formation in the simulation, as we also see in Windy.

 

On the first picture above however one can see that seen from the ground, it appears reasonably clear weather, yet it is anything but clear but very athmospheric. This would become apparent when you fly and you look back down, you wouldn't have the clear vision REX presents you with. It is by all means the weather where you can get lost, if you are not very familiar with the scenery. The default weather shows that predicament more clearly.

 

What is missing so far is that weather from one side doesn't really look like the weather from the other side, like looking through a tinted window. It is only transparent if you look from the dark side to the bright side. This subtlety (that might well kill you in real life) is not there, or if you put it there, it looks cioarse from all sides, as seen in the default weather. In this sense, METAR data can be extremely misleading and should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by ZachariasX