MilViz also did the 310 (310R) with the longer nose for XP11. As Dan said though, they made strange choices for the two airplanes they tested the market with. The Turbo-Otter is pretty neat, and I am glad I picked it up, but sexy it is not. It’s almost like they expected people to fall over themselves to buy their airplanes because of their reputation (which is good of course). I think they threw in the towel far to quickly.
I’ll probably buy the A2A Spitfire. I already have a Mk9 for XP though, so hopefully it will bring something special to the table.
FYI. When readjusting things to get the flight model more realistic, this does something that puts the pilot viewpoint in VR to a position above the cockpit and forward into the glare shield. Maybe a CG thing? Just Rift-S?
The fix is to stand up and lean forward when you reset the view.
Am I to understand that A2A is developing for XP11?
[picture some sort of meme with heavenly light breaking through clouds and a chorus of angels singing in the background…too busy to do a Google search]
Its great news that a2a is doing addons for xp11. What i realy want to have from a2a on xp11 asap is their connie and b377.
Imho is a master shame that you not have a single 4 prop liner on xp11 well done when you already have dozens of c172, 737 and a320 clones.
It looks like taboo, that not a single company developed a 4 prop liner when you have hundreds of them and i’m not begging a specific aircraft like the XPTO-123abc, its only a type of aircraft that in the history of aviation you have many amazing birds and very classic ones that were very representative and landmarks of aviation history. Examples: DC-6, B377, Connie, Electra, An-22, Il-18, AC-130,…
The ones that exist are very very poor quality.
So a2a connie and b377 asap on xp11 is my dream that i hope soon will be realised.
About spit, is mehhhh, i like the aircraft, but in il2 boX or dcs, xp11 with fighters, have the same taste as dcs with a c152…
Yeah, I think that it has issues with 11, which prevented me from purchasing it. If someone here has been successful in getting it to run, please sound off.
pmdg dc6 on xp11 is a sad story, because its easy fixes, whatever they can say, the 99% of the work is already done (3d modeling, investigation, data research, sounds, modelings, systems etc etc. But as we know, pmdg only focus on what give them more Money, their B-birds. So they never worried to do a easy fix. The issues: some performance behavior need to be updated to match and be in agreement with the recently and new xp11 flight model engine and a issue wiith the plugin that can only works if you reactivate it (disable+enable) after every aircraft load.
I, and i think not only me, dont mind to pay a fee for that upgrade, infact i even dont mind to pay a full price, but its the situation were is not a matter of you want to buy or not, is a matter of exist or not, and until now, a dc6 for xp11 perfectly done like dc6 was on xp10, not exist
So when XP11 changes the flight model—as they recently did according to a video linked in a Mudspike thread—how does that impact previously released aircraft?
For example, according to the video, they incorporated proper winglet effects (I think …I may have that wrong … I’m at a bar right now and…you get the picture…but if not winglets, some/one of their other improvements). Does the way XP does the flight model as a function of the airfoils, mean that changes to the flight model are automatically implemented? Or do developers need to rework things?
The situation with xp11 and it happened with xp10 also, is that manytimes the changes is not only on the big new features, sometimes is revamps or improves on engines modules and aerodynamic general behavior. Because 99,99999999999% of xp birds use xp core engine to simulate things manytimes they affect the previous behavior of the aircraft. What sometimes happens also is that, all simulators have their limitations and things not perfectly moduled and some devs to match the real aircraft behavior use some tricks (that happens in fsx and xplane). For example the use of internal hidden wings or engines or other things that not visually, interact with the addon in a way to give a more real behavior than the core engine have. When the engine is updated, to better, you should change or remove this tricks or reconfig your parameters.
For exemple many simulators not perfectly simulate a free wheel turbo prop like the famous PT6, so they use crazy tricks to try have it close. If engine module change you should follow the changes.
Example: imagine that in reality 2x2=4, and in your sim 2x2=3, you should do all the time AxB+1 to have the correct answer. If later the engine have the multiply operation correctly done, you should remove the trick to have the correct answer again. Maybe this is not a perfect exemple, but i hope you have the idea, in simulation engines were you parametrize addons, because limitations of engines you should use some tricks, sometimes change parameters different than real expected values, others adding hidden aircraft parts, others use external custom made physics engine like a2a and flight factor a320 did.
So its common that only because engine change some addons needs to be revalidated and adjusted if need, sometimes is crazy things like, hooooo, landing gear not works anymore or apu not startup as before, etc etc
In the most recent instance you’d be hard pressed to notice the difference. There is a transition where you can leave unchecked (by default) “Use Experimental Flight Model” and save it for a point in time when your fleet has been updated by their developers. I can’t really recall a time where a plane or helicopter became porked when an update dropped.
I’m far from an expert on these things, but sometimes it’s not noticeable and others it porks every aircraft from a developer, like Carenado/Alabeo/Thranda. If you are worried about braking aircraft, then it’s best to follow the forum posts for the airplane you enjoy flying before doing updates. If your hanger runneth over, then update away. I’ve personally waited over a year to fly a broken aircraft. Occasionally, the community will fix it before a dev gets around to it.
Copy that. I update whenever I see that I need to. But how do I see that I need to?
My concern is more or less something like this: I just sent $59.95 for the nice FJS 727 v3 (my ride for the Xmas flight), and now I’m wondering if it might be “broken” by the last XP11 update.
We have something similar with DCS Beta updates but there is a lot more transparency with those updates. I’m not “feeling the love” when it comes to XP11…just say’n.
I have xp since xp5, and followed all updates and versions. Nowadays I have xp11 and 103 payware addons aircraft installed on it, following their forums, updates issues etc etc. So, if sometimes isolated situations the problem is someone installed it wrong, the mayority of the situations when arrives a new xp patch is because the new features, as such that even addon devs sometimes recommend to not immediatelly update to the lastest patch and wait for tests.
As mentioned before manytimes patches broken the behavior of addon, because addon was parametrized to such a behavior/physics and after the patch that reality changes, sometimes is even internal variables are splited or name changed, or have new physics simulating that interact with others.
Specifically with DC6, it was tested and certified to xp10, xp10 to xp11 is not only a visual engine updates, it have many internal changes, as such that for exemple the Felis An24 out-of-the-box (vanilla) version works perfectly on xp10 and if you put it on xp11 directly, you not have landing gears opened when load on runway, apu not turn on, AP works very wrong with oscilations (because changes in physics that disturb the controller that expected a model that is now changed). To work now it was adapted and hard modded to work now.
So, DC6 (on xp11) is the same, if its works or some parts works is coincidence and sometimes a placebo way were you think that its all ok beause is plausible. Even PMDG officially agreed that DC6 is for xp10 ONLY not 11…
And this is not a problem of xp or Austin, they are doing a nice job, this is a core problem of any simulator that constantly receives updates and improvements where addons devs not follow in the same rate or speed, you have the same in DCS World with some modules, now works, after a patch, sometimes something is broken that requires 3rd party devs attention.
So far I’ve really liked the flight models in XP11. They may not be 100% perfect but then, what sim is? We used to say something about perfection being the enemy of good enough…or something like that…the idea being that if something isn’t broken, don’t fix it.
I think the XP11 flight models are much better than good enough. I wish they would stop fiddling with them and get to work fixing the truly broken stuff like ATC.
(Yes, I’ve downloaded Pilot2ATC… it looks promising but you practically need a Masters degree in computers…which I have and I still can’t seem to figure it out…yikes)
