Learning from Flight Sim

[happytraveller]

FS housekeeping.

I recently deleted the FS9 files (FSX all the way now) but had a look through them before deleting. I found that I had downloaded/bought lots of aircraft that I had installed but seldom used. Looking at the scenery library, it was a similar story there, lots of nice add-ons that had been installed but rarely used after the initial trial. The liveries that had been installed looked like the pages of Janes Aviation, and when I sat down and thought about it, then I realised that apart from a few core aircraft and locations, most of this had been sitting idle. Flying into places like Wellington, I was just using AirNZ and perhaps Pacific, so the extra liveries for other airlines were often not used.

Bad news for developers, but I made a resolution that with the re-install of FSX, that it was going to be different. Whilst aircraft like the PMDG 747 are fantastic, the experience from FS9 has taught me that often I do not have the time to start them, as even getting them onto the runway lined up takes about 45 minutes or more (by the time that you have started the engines and programmed the FMC) My favourite flight (ie the one done most often) turns out to be a C182 from Rangiora to CHC in fog/rain/turbulence/cloud with an ILS approach. With perhaps an hour to spend on the sim, this fits in well, whereas aircraft like the PMDG, although fantastic, need a whole afternoon to get a full flight in. By concentrating on fewer aircraft this time, I will actually be able to learn their characteristics and will not need to go hunting in the manuals for engine out speeds or glide speeds. I hope to spend more time actually flying and less time installing the add-ons. It will be the same with the scenery add-ons, thins time I will not purchase every new area that has a rave review, but I will concentrate on NZ and a few other choice locations, then get to know them.

Another thing with the new install is that I am trying to avoid the mess that the FS9 folder was in, with files all over the place. The new install is going to be better organized, which hopefully will make finding things easier. Even things like charts and manuals are going to be organized this time. The old FS9 folder had grown into a monster, this time I am trying to keep FSX in order. Quality rather than quantity this time.

Smooth landings.

[Bazza]

I can't disagree with a single word of your post.....

I decided to concentrate on New Zealand some time back and apart from some "icon" airports overseas have tended to ignore to ignore off-shore stuff.

This came about when I realised that I could rarely spare more than 60 minutes at a go to devote to flying anywhere. About this time I decided to bail out of the airline type stuff and concentrate on light aircraft. So far it has worked well for me, however "horses for courses," some members clearly have different needs and "fair enough."

I have never been able to see the sense in some aircraft downloads coming with multiple liveries. I suggested this on another forum and was politely told to "pull my head in" so decided not to pursue the point. It was my suggestion that the different liveries could be selected later depending on need. Obviously many do this, see AVSIMS repaint section. Like you, some of my downloads are supported with 6 paint schemes, 5 of which have never seen the light of day. Probably 90% of my planes are never used.

I created a file named Flight Sim Hangar, outside FS9, for those downloads that I didn't like for one reason or another yet I didn't want to delete. It is huge now, full of stuff that has been bypassed
with better designed stuff and most of the default MS ones. You have motivated me to go and clean it out.

I have decided to persevere with FS9 but one of the reasons I might change would be to "house-keep" and start over again.

[Naki]

I agree entirely with the above two posts and rarely have time for more than 60 minutes flight so I have also mostly ignored airliners and I concentrate on GA and warbirds - also concentate on New Zealand (of course), Alaska and North West US - only other scenery I have outside those two is Lukla and St Maarten and a couple on the US East Coast - about 95% of my scenery also has a GA bent so large airports are out.

[Timmo]

fourthed!

I have similar reasons although with the added factor of development- Ill often download (or purchase) a scenery just to get some ideas to apply to my own stuff....most of the time in the sim is simply testing scenery!

Usually the longest time actually spent flying is with Flightsim.co.nz Friday Night Flights- These are great as the ATC is spot on, VFR/IFR rules and airspace requirments need to be adhered to and you are flying with 'human' pilots with whom you need to communicate with.

For the most part I fly aircraft that I have a 'need' to fly- The C172 gets a lot of work since this is what im training in, the R22 does as well as that is a potential real world flying path and sometimes the smaller GA aircraft such as the Kingair for IFR stuff

Im sure this will change as I get more proficient in real world flying though.

[happytraveller]

Good to know that I am not unique then!!

smooth landings.

[Charl]

QUOTE (happytraveller @ May 19 2008, 04:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good to know that I am not unique then!!
smooth landings.

You're clearly not, and I am filled with admiration for that.
I cannot pass up an interesting-looking download, and my computer resembles the nest of a pack-rat.
I've managed to wean myself of dumping everything into the live sim folder, as startup times generally go into cuppatea territory.
I keep everything, though, and constantly "fix" things in the sim.
When it is perfect, is the time to fiddle again, Who Knows what lies beyond the next horizon?
For this reason I often don't know what combination of addons I am running, they sometimes give really peculiar results.
However that is simply more motivation to "fix" it again.
And sometimes, just sometimes, people pull worthy uploads from the likes of AVSIM - then I smile, and dig in the toybox...and produce it!
In ths way I have re-discovered gems, that for one reason or another (poor performance mainly) have only now come into their own.
Oh, and on a separate bootable HDD I have a plain vanilla FS9 (and FSX, I have to confess) installation, just in case that last "fix" really was terminal
It takes the utmost discipline not to "fix" them, but I haven't...yet.

[spongebob206]

Cheers
Derek

[ardypilot]

QUOTE

I cannot pass up an interesting-looking download, and my computer resembles the nest of a pack-rat.[/quote]
A man after my own heart! I said the same thing as you last time I installed FS9 happytraveller, yet one download leads to another and after a few months you end up with a big 20gb plus mess... next time I'll keep it in separate folders for sure

[Bazza]

Gentlemen, I have never seen such an overall outburst of honesty in all my years of simming......

[deeknow]

QUOTE (happytraveller @ May 19 2008, 10:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I made a resolution that with the re-install of FSX, that it was going to be different.

Heh, yeah, good luck with that HT, lets see how long you last

I've just rebuilt my home machine and had the same idea, stick w the stuff I fly the most... PMDG 1900D, PIC 737/300, Flight1 ATR, Hughes500, FU24 and a few others that I use with vANZ (A320 and Jetstream32).

The slippery slope started for me though with AI aircraft (VOZ, GNZLAP, HTAI) , schedules and AFCAD updates. Installing some sound packs and effects, a few scenery libraries I couldn't do without, next thing you know there's a wee bit of chaos creeping in, and its bloody hard to stop unless you're a Virgo, or maybe an accountant or someone else with a tidy/ordered mind

[gojozoom]

You all know and experinced that we actually spend more time tweaking FS, searching for aircrafts, liveries than we actually use them. I haven't started up my FS for two weeks now, but spent hours looking for nice propliners each day. Even if I had them I'd hardly use them for more then a few 20 minutes flights.

BUT!

I think this is the part of flightsimming what keeps us motivated and hungry for new stuff. Ok, maybe we have to do a cleanup every month to delete unused files and add-ons...but who cares?

I'm a 27 years old engineer and I'm more excited for a new aircraft or a multiplayer flight, than for a pay raise or anything else in my real-world career. That's because we are all maniacs of our hobby, wich gives us a nice company of other maniacs , and a few more happy hours in our everydays.

I feel very lucky to have this hobby, and be a part of this great community!

Thansk all! (especially for the guys who created and maintain this forum for us, for free)!

[Snowman]

QUOTE (gojozoom @ May 21 2008, 09:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You all know and experinced that we actually spend more time tweaking FS, searching for aircrafts, liveries than we actually use them.

Yeah,............. i know what you mean.,
The last 18 months or so, has seen me doing virtually no flying, just tweaking, and building sceneries and other projects.......
Not that i mind,.............. i love the building work, just as much as the flying..............

Lawrie.

[turbofire]

I haven't been around much since joining back in March I think. Had lots of year end stuff, kids graduating from college, from med school, building a house, etc. etc. etc. I haven't had a lot of time. However, I did manage to install FS9, had been using FS2000. I have found that FS9 does have more features, and then, well, I dunno. I was and am still happy with FS2k and tend to go back and forth, flying this and that. Of course, FS9 has the virtual cockpit, but, I still like to see a workable panel. Here are some interesting comparisions:

FS9 - probably, for me, the BIGGEST feature, I can now land on the water! Thus, I have every flying boat I could find installed on FS9. I tend to lean towards the old vintage planes, for some and for me - memories, LOL. As I used to work on C54's, C97's, and many of the older prop planes, it is fun to be able to fly them again. BIGGEST disappointment with FS9 is the new GPS. I really liked the one in FS2K. Another disappointment, isn't so much with FS9 as the many models designed with incorrect number of gauges (i.e., if you have four engines, then, you should have four sets of gauges, not two as I have found on many models).

FS2K - probably the inability to land and take off from water is the main problem. The jerky movement, at times, when looking at the scenery. The ability to fly dirigibles and blimps is a feature I enjoy. In FS9 I have found this almost impossible, not impossible, but difficult.

I have the biggest set of video cards possible along with a HUGE processor...which allows me to run either program well.

FS9 does weird stuff, at times. I wanted to edit a B314 panel in FS9, the editior insisted the panel didn't exist....yet I could see it in the aircraft file. I transferred the model to FS2K, for the hell of it, and behold, the editor I use for FS2K could see the panel. I made the changes I wanted while the program was in the FS2K file and then transferred it back to the FS9 file and it worked! Inexplicable weirdness with some models in FS9. In FS2K, model would either be there or not. With FS9, models are there, but then, not fully functional. Like I said, weird.

As it stands, both FS9 and FS2K have their merits and problems. I fly aircraft in both, depending on what I want to do. I want to fly from two points using the water as a runway, I use FS9. When flying other aircraft, it depends on which program gives the better flight and ease of use. Many of the panels in FS9 tend to be difficult as whoever designed them tried to make them be as realistic as possible. However, many of these, although look realistic are missing gauges, that as a pilot, I notice. I like many of the panels in FS2K as they are, for any other way to put it, better designed.

Sorry for the long post, I felt the need, I guess. LOL

[Alex]

QUOTE (turbofire @ Jun 2 2008, 10:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another disappointment, isn't so much with FS9 as the many models designed with incorrect number of gauges (i.e., if you have four engines, then, you should have four sets of gauges, not two as I have found on many models).

This might be because your downloaded aircraft didn't come with a panel, so FS automatically chose the 'best' option from the default panels (usually not a good choice at all). What sort of aircraft are you looking for panels with? Chances are there'll be a panel similar to the one you're looking for floating around somewhere...

Alex