GWJ FBO: Flight Simulation Catch-all

Thanks. Got one!

Now about that nvidia 30XX upgrade...

Yes, that is happening as well.

Nice little update on Honeycomb posted on their FB page.

A quick update.
A big thanks to everyone for your patience and understanding.
We have gone through all transactions and canceled all orders over one unit per person.
Everyone will be moved up in the que accordingly. Please have a little patience and do not contact support for you delivery window right away. We'll email an update out in a few days.
We're also looking at handing the Ebay situation, but I think a lot of them will be pulled now that they're only getting one unit each.
I know everyone has been waiting a really long time for the Bravo and we're honored by your patience, understanding and brand loyalty.
I am really happy with the end result and glad that we didn't cut any corners to rush the Bravo to market. I'm certain that when you get your hands on the product, you will too.
September will be an exciting month for us. There will be an announcement about Honeycomb from friends of ours in Seattle mid-month and we'll follow that up with official product announcements towards the end of the month. Last but not least, I'm very proud to announce that the Alpha Flight Controls have just been approved by the FAA for flight training. This is a first for a consumer yoke. (details to follow).
I wish you all happy flying,
Nicki (Founder)

Maybe we'll get moved up the list MisterStatic

The Yoke news is kinda cool, especially given there are $1,000 consumer yokes out there, but unlike those, Honeycomb is an 'murican company so maybe they got special status (parts are still manufactured in China of course).

If they assemble them in the US, they can still be TAA compatible.

(Little trivia joke for those in the know.)

I've made many landings now, but only a few of them have been smooth as butter. One thing I've been struggling with is what altitude I need to be at and when. I thought I'd make life easier after reading about ILS landings and glide slopes. I interpreted that as the aircraft would handle my altitude for me as I come in for the approach, but that doesn't seem to happen. I've set the NAV frequency correctly for the target airport, selected APR on the Garmin 1000 (I'm flying a Diamond DA62 mostly) and whilst it seems to pick up the heading and direct me to the runway, it's not controlling my altitude at all. What am I missing?

Engine power, nose attitude and flap control, as well as drag from lowering the wheels, should help, if I remember correctly.

Robear wrote:

Engine power, nose attitude and flap control, as well as drag from lowering the wheels, should help, if I remember correctly.

This. Autopilot != autothrottle. Same for airplane configuration (flaps, gear) - if you've got max throttle and no flaps, the aircraft isn't capable of holding that glideslope.

Another thought, it's possible the autopilot is controlling to airspeed, and you get whatever altitude ends up holding that airspeed, based on aircraft/engine configuration.

Another thought, it's possible you're never intercepting the glideslope, which will cue the autopilot to capture the glideslope? Maybe you're sitting above it the whole time?

EDIT - it's a bit long winded, but I also found this Youtube video about using APR mode on the Garmin - I wonder if you missed a final step....

For smoother landings, speed really is critical for landing. There is no authrottle in a DA62, so if you're fast and high, if you don't adjust the throttle, the AP has no choice but to make you faster as you nose down given constant throttle, which of course makes it harder to descend... so it noses you down further and faster. According to the DA62 POH, Vapp speed is 85 knots with full flaps, so ideally you want to be fully configured, stabilized and on the glideslope at that speed a few miles out maybe 2 or 3 at most in a small aircraft. Twins do act differently than singles, but in a single engine prop (like 152 or 172) you are at or near idle on throttle as you make your final descent and as soon as you are sure you can make the runway you go to full idle. Assuming your aircraft is trimmed correctly, you will maintain speed and as you get to around 10-20 feet off the ground start your gradual flare and touch down. The ground effect in MSFS isn't great so touching down smoothly the way you do in the real thing doesn't quite work the same, but it'll get you there.

Regarding ILS approach, I can't speak for how well the APPR mode works in MSFS as I haven't used it yet, but in order for it to work you must engage it while your aircraft is BELOW the glidepath. If you are too high (ie. the diamonds are below the middle on the Glide SLope Indicator), you won't be able to capture vertical guidance, only lateral. Ideally, you would press the APPR button with the diamonds one or two "ticks" above the horizon. Also, because there is no autoland, you ultimately have to disconnect and just use the PAPI lights by the runway (assuming they are avaialble), to help you with vertical guidance.

Also, while I don't think its necessary, you may want to make sure your Flight Directors are on in a G1000 aircraft.

See the chart below from KAPC in Napa.

Your text to link here...

you want to be at 2600 feet before you hit the FESAV waypoint 12.5 DME from the localizer. As you approach that fix, if you're already at 2600 you should start to see the diamonds coming down as you get closer, so feel free to hit APPR whenever you feel like it as long as they are above the midpoint.

Thanks all. I think I'm coming in above the glidepath, so APR isn't doing anything.

I've been following this game with interest, a little too intimidated still to try it but will eventually give it a try.

Overall reviews have been fairly positive but there was a wild "review" on Kotaku where the author claims that MS basically only included the "easy" stuff and proved his point by determining that some remote mine was not in game (which it turns out is in game, he just got lost) and then proceeds to go on a huge rant implying that this is the beginning of the nefarious takeover of gaming by corporations because this requires cloud support to run.

At the end, no idea if he thought it was a good game. States it is impressive technology but spent most of the time discussing how everyone will be microtransactioned to death and that there are lots of bugs. I swear if this had been produced by anyone but Microsoft the focus would have been on the good stuff....

https://kotaku.com/microsoft-flight-...

In case any of you were waiting for the Twin Otter in MSFS (or just planes from Aerosoft in general)...

Docjoe wrote:

I've been following this game with interest, a little too intimidated still to try it but will eventually give it a try.

If you're already a gamepass subscriber and have even just a small curiousity or interest in Flight Sim and aviation, you really should check it out. It does take over 100gb and at least a relatively updated PC but if you have that, and I would strongly recommend having some sort of controller. It sounds like its been tuned to be accessible even with an xbone controller, so if you have that minimum it you can give it a whirl.

As far as flying goes it is very accessible. Compared to its peers, xplane and p3d, the tutorials and "assists" make it pretty easy to get up in the air without having to worry about a lot of what you need to deal with for actual flying.

Regarding microtransactions or whatever nonsense was in the Kotaku review, I'm not sure what the reviewer is basing that on. Base Flightsim software, whether Microsoft or its competitors has always been about a base game and 3rd parties have always been the teams that fill in more realistic (mostly payware) scenery and aircraft. The fact that there is already a pretty good amount of payware scenery available I would argue is a good thing as that means these 3rd party developers have been able to get it created quickly, and at least now believe it is a viable platform from a business standpoint.

Newb here.

Trying to setup binds for my HOTAS.

Is it possible to have axis do double duty? For instance, I tried binding the yaw and pitch axis to camera yaw and pitch with LOCK, then bound a button to the camera axis lock function. It sort of works. The camera doesn't change while I'm flying the plane, but the plane still pitches and yaws along with camera movement when I activate the camera controls. I was hoping for more of a mode toggle. Maybe this is possible a different way?

I'm pretty sure that as long as you are in a cockpit view, your yaw/pitch/roll axis will command your aircraft to do that no matter what. It sounds like you were able bind some camera movement in addition to that, but I don't think you can override the basic controls.

If you have an extra xbox controller, that is pretty good for camera controls, or a hatswitch on your yoke. Curious is there a particular reason you want the actual stick axis to control the camera?

Anyone have an advice on TrackIR? I decided to finally finish knocking out my Commercial pilot's license just for fun, and it would be nice to practice in MSFS. Commercial maneuvers are mostly based on outside references, so it would be great if I could just turn my head to track the horizon rather than dicking around with the hat switch on my HOTAS. For those who have Track IR, would you recommend it? Is it worth the $130 or so it's running right now on Amazon?

Pretty stoked about this updated MSFS. It's nice to be able to have reasonably accurate landmarks to practice flights. I'm also looking forward to brushing up my instrument approaches. It has been a long time since I've shot any approaches and I want to get current again. I'll knock out a BFR in the near future, so getting familiar with modern avionics will be crucial. I learned to fly on steam gauges and while I've flown glass cockpits in military aircraft, I don't have enough hours with them to feel really comfortable.

Finally, has anyone else had issues with pitch control? Even after fooling with the sensitivity I find that relatively small control inputs result in very large attitude changes, way beyond what would be normal in a real aircraft. It made take-off...challenging. Haha!

For VFR flying absolutely yes on TrackIR. Landmarks and scenery are so good in MSFS and it’s so much better to look around while you fly. If you learned to fly IRL in a Cessna you know how challenging it could be to look over the dashboard particularly in climb. The ability to just peak over and look around is great.

If you are going to get trackir i recommend getting it with the pro clip. The only downside is that you end up with more cables, including the one coming from your head with the clip. My only regret is not getting it sooner.

Regarding IFR flying, it’s still pretty spotty in MSFS. A lot of procedures don’t work quite right, most airports don’t have all the procedures available, the g1000 doesn’t have all of the functions, and I think the autopilot is a bit sketchy.

And yes pitch and rudder controls in MSFS are really over sensitive. I set both sensitivities pretty far to the right and it’s still pretty bad. If you have joystick buttons assigned to trim that also doesn’t work great. You have to tap-tap-tap to move it inctremenatlly. If you hold it down it just goes out of control.

That explains a lot, that bit about the buttons. Thanks!

For those of you looking for joysticks for Flight Simulator 2020 or maybe the upcoming Star Wars Squadrons, Gamestop (of all places) has the Thrustmaster T-Flight HOTAS One in stock to ship at basically its MSRP. Says XBox One but works on PC with drivers from the Thrustmaster site.

This is probably the cheapest HOTAS you're going to get for a while with most retailers OOS of everything and ebay sellers scalping incorrigibly. They also have the T-Flight HOTAS 4, the PlayStation 4 version, which I -think- will also work on PC and differs in minor cosmetic and button layout details.

https://www.gamestop.com/video-games...

Is there anybody here who can help me make sense of the myriad array of entries in the Il-2 franchise? It appears there's the Il-2 Great Battles series where Battle of Stalingrad is the "base game" and then there are various other theaters/campaigns as DLC, and Il-2 Cliffs of Dover Blitz stands on its own with Desert Wings - Tobruk as its only DLC/add-on? Why the bifurcation?

If I'm primarily interested in a single-player campaign and maybe being able to hop into instant action dogfights with little enthusiasm for online play, is it worth considering these sims at all?

Carlbear95 wrote:

I'm pretty sure that as long as you are in a cockpit view, your yaw/pitch/roll axis will command your aircraft to do that no matter what. It sounds like you were able bind some camera movement in addition to that, but I don't think you can override the basic controls.

If you have an extra xbox controller, that is pretty good for camera controls, or a hatswitch on your yoke. Curious is there a particular reason you want the actual stick axis to control the camera?

Bummer. I was hoping to not have to swap controllers. I have buttons for quick views in the cardinal or 45 degree angles. But I was hoping to just be able to pick sweet camera angles by toggling a key. Makes me wonder what the purpose of the free look lock button is.

Middcore wrote:

Is there anybody here who can help me make sense of the myriad array of entries in the Il-2 franchise? It appears there's the Il-2 Great Battles series where Battle of Stalingrad is the "base game" and then there are various other theaters/campaigns as DLC, and Il-2 Cliffs of Dover Blitz stands on its own with Desert Wings - Tobruk as its only DLC/add-on? Why the bifurcation?

If I'm primarily interested in a single-player campaign and maybe being able to hop into instant action dogfights with little enthusiasm for online play, is it worth considering these sims at all?

Yeah, this can be a bit complicated. In short, there are three generations of the IL-2 series:
* IL-2 Sturmovik (2001) - original; IL-2 1946 (2006) was the big expansion for it; some people still play this
* IL-2 Cliffs of Dover ("CloD") - developed by Maddox games (who did the original); this was essentially abandoned by the devs and picked up by a mod team, which recently released the Tobruk expansion
* IL-2: Great Battles (2013) - Battles of Stalingrad, Moscow, Kuban, Bodenplatte, and Normandy (soon); plus Flying Circus (WWI) and Tank Crew (Early Access)

I played the original and Great Battles. I've heard decent things about Tobruk, but haven't played it. The CloD and Great Battles engines are incompatible.

While Stalingrad is the "base game" for Great Battles, from what I understand you only need to buy that module if you're playing through Steam. If you buy directly from the developers and play through their launcher, you can start with whichever battle interests you. One nice thing about their system is that whenever they update the engine for newer modules, those general updates percolate throughout all the Great Battles modules. So, even though Stalingrad is the oldest module, it still looks pretty good.

They frequently have sales with steep discounts on the earlier modules, so if you're uncertain I would suggest you wait for one. The most recent sale was coincidentally around the time that MSFS launched (August 18-24), and they had Stalingrad 85% off, Moscow & Kuban 75% off, and Bodenplatte & Flying Circus 66% off.

I only really play the games single player. They have quick mission builders, a career mode, and some "scripted campaigns" for people who get bored of career mode. These tend to be aimed more toward experienced pilots. There is a lot of online play, but I haven't dipped my toe into that.

If you want an idea of how career modes work, there are some youtubers out there who run series. One of my favorites is Wolfpack, who has done a number of series covering the various modules. I've linked the first entry in his P-51 serious below.

You might also want some help in learning how to fly the wide variety of aircraft in the games. For that, check out The Air Combat Tutorial Library by Requiem on YT. He has videos that cover principles, plus videos that cover most of the individual aircraft in Great Battles.

Hrdina wrote:
Middcore wrote:

Is there anybody here who can help me make sense of the myriad array of entries in the Il-2 franchise? It appears there's the Il-2 Great Battles series where Battle of Stalingrad is the "base game" and then there are various other theaters/campaigns as DLC, and Il-2 Cliffs of Dover Blitz stands on its own with Desert Wings - Tobruk as its only DLC/add-on? Why the bifurcation?

If I'm primarily interested in a single-player campaign and maybe being able to hop into instant action dogfights with little enthusiasm for online play, is it worth considering these sims at all?

Yeah, this can be a bit complicated. In short, there are three generations of the IL-2 series:
* IL-2 Sturmovik (2001) - original; IL-2 1946 (2006) was the big expansion for it; some people still play this
* IL-2 Cliffs of Dover ("CloD") - developed by Maddox games (who did the original); this was essentially abandoned by the devs and picked up by a mod team, which recently released the Tobruk expansion
* IL-2: Great Battles (2013) - Battles of Stalingrad, Moscow, Kuban, Bodenplatte, and Normandy (soon); plus Flying Circus (WWI) and Tank Crew (Early Access)

I played the original and Great Battles. I've heard decent things about Tobruk, but haven't played it. The CloD and Great Battles engines are incompatible.

While Stalingrad is the "base game" for Great Battles, from what I understand you only need to buy that module if you're playing through Steam. If you buy directly from the developers and play through their launcher, you can start with whichever battle interests you. One nice thing about their system is that whenever they update the engine for newer modules, those general updates percolate throughout all the Great Battles modules. So, even though Stalingrad is the oldest module, it still looks pretty good.

They frequently have sales with steep discounts on the earlier modules, so if you're uncertain I would suggest you wait for one. The most recent sale was coincidentally around the time that MSFS launched (August 18-24), and they had Stalingrad 85% off, Moscow & Kuban 75% off, and Bodenplatte & Flying Circus 66% off.

I only really play the games single player. They have quick mission builders, a career mode, and some "scripted campaigns" for people who get bored of career mode. These tend to be aimed more toward experienced pilots. There is a lot of online play, but I haven't dipped my toe into that.

If you want an idea of how career modes work, there are some youtubers out there who run series. One of my favorites is Wolfpack, who has done a number of series covering the various modules. I've linked the first entry in his P-51 serious below.

You might also want some help in learning how to fly the wide variety of aircraft in the games. For that, check out The Air Combat Tutorial Library by Requiem on YT. He has videos that cover principles, plus videos that cover most of the individual aircraft in Great Battles.

Thanks for the rundown. I remember Il-2/Il-2 1946 back in the early 2000's but I never played it. What's the deal with CloD vs CloD Blitz, though? Blitz is just an updated release I presume? The Battle of Britain setting interested me the most of the current options but reviews for CloD Blitz seem really mixed, lots of complaints about the UI/menus and control bindings, I guess that makes more sense if it's actually a different developer than the Great Battles series, which had escaped me completely.

I have actually watched some of Wolfpack's videos because he was just about the only YouTuber I could find who showed single-player gameplay as opposed to online. I would like to think I don't need too much in the way of tutorializing on how to handle an aircraft of the era in combat, as I put many many hours in the MS Combat Flight Simulator series years ago and basically ate, slept, and breathed this stuff growing up.

Let me ask about something else (now I feel like this is a conversation in an RPG). Back in the days when I played MSCFS, there was always a "press X to skip to the next action sequence" thing that prevented bomber escort missions from Britain to Berlin and back from actually taking a full day. Is there anything like that in the Il-2 games? I know realism and all, but my time for games is probably even more limited than it was back then in junior high. I guess it helps that all of the sorties in the campaigns depicted in the Il-2 games seem like they would be relatively short-ranged.

Middcore wrote:

Thanks for the rundown. I remember Il-2/Il-2 1946 back in the early 2000's but I never played it. What's the deal with CloD vs CloD Blitz, though? Blitz is just an updated release I presume? The Battle of Britain setting interested me the most of the current options but reviews for CloD Blitz seem really mixed, lots of complaints about the UI/menus and control bindings, I guess that makes more sense if it's actually a different developer than the Great Battles series, which had escaped me completely.

Yeah, from what I read CloD Blitz was the result when the mod team (Team Fusion) took over CloD and re-released it as something playable. In general, Great Battles is a supposedly vastly improved engine compared to CloD, so I found it a little surprising when they announced the Tobruk expansion.

Middcore wrote:

I have actually watched some of Wolfpack's videos because he was just about the only YouTuber I could find who showed single-player gameplay as opposed to online.

If you've watched Wolfpack, you have a good idea about career mode then.

Middcore wrote:

Let me ask about something else (now I feel like this is a conversation in an RPG). Back in the days when I played MSCFS, there was always a "press X to skip to the next action sequence" thing that prevented bomber escort missions from Britain to Berlin and back from actually taking a full day. Is there anything like that in the Il-2 games?

There is no "skip" feature because there are no pre-set "encounters". You can put on the autopilot an accelerate time up to 8x, though. Yes, most of the sorties on IL2:GB maps are relatively short-ranged but I definitely accelerate time between the airfield and the front lines. You can also start missions already in the air, if you like.

Thanks again for the info, Hrdina. Will probably look at picking up Battle of Bodenplatte in the relatively near future when my HOTAS arrives and I have a bit more time to devote to it.

On another note, what sites do people recommend for keeping up with sim news these days, especially newly released and upcoming aircraft for FS2020? I've basically decided to hold off purchasing it until there are more of the type of planes I'm personally interested in (general aviation and vintage prop stuff) so I want to stay abreast of the latest.

Avsim.com and Flightsim.com's file libraries still look exactly as I remember them 15 years ago, which is equal parts nostalgic and flabbergasting. I can even search up the repaints for some of my favorite payware planes I did back then.

Middcore wrote:

On another note, what sites do people recommend for keeping up with sim news these days, especially newly released and upcoming aircraft for FS2020? I've basically decided to hold off purchasing it until there are more of the type of planes I'm personally interested in (general aviation and vintage prop stuff) so I want to stay abreast of the latest.

fselite.net and thresholdx.net are my goto places for general fligthsim news for all 3 major sims. For x-plane, x-plane.org is the gold standard of aviation communities IMO.

A few more free realism mods are being released:

C152 Realism

A320N realism mod

Both seem to be off to a decent start. Both focus primarily on updating system functionality, particularly the a320. Its not clear how much either does (or can) focus on actual flight dynamics. Adjusting the stall speed in the C152 is great, but how does it feel as it approaches the updated stall speed is just as important. I'm curious if there is some limitation with regards to the "assists". For example if someone wanted to model the left-hand yaw in climb more realistically or have the trim wheel react better , how would MS's "auto-rudder" or "auto-trim" react to that? I would have to think that a realism mod would require those assists to be off, but maybe MSFS doesn't allow for that sort of "requirement"?

Question on realism mods like you linked...

Am I right in thinking that those mods won't auto-update? I'll have to go snag the latest files and dump them into my mods folder to capture mod-updates?

Jonman wrote:

Question on realism mods like you linked...

Am I right in thinking that those mods won't auto-update? I'll have to go snag the latest files and dump them into my mods folder to capture mod-updates?

AFAIK you are correct. Have to download an updated version, delete old, and replace with new. I really haven't tried either one yet, but I may take the A320 out for a spin just to make sure I'm installing it correctly. Seat Belt signs and ADIRS functionality are easy enough to test without having to actually start the aircraft.

Thanks Carl, I think that's a vote for me waiting for mods to mature (or a reliable mod manager is available) before going too far down that path. I don't need another IT job.