About the GS bit...

[Erick_Cantu]

I'd like to know why the issue stands anyway - I thought the point was, the pilot flew the plane, not the computer? Just my two cents: "if you don't like it, fly it by hand!"

Flame away...mods feel free to delete, it just gets on my nerves how people whine so much over a relatively small matter!!! :-)

-E

PS: If you don't like how FS2002 handles autoland...try it in FS95, and I can easily arrange that!!!

[font size=1]

FLIGHTFX POLICY

1.) We design for reality, not for idealism.
Thus, you will not see virtual cabins on our aircraft. You can not see inside the real thing anyway, unless you are looking into the sun. You will find virtual cockpits but they will not be visible from outside for the same reason.
2.) We design for people with real computers. Thusly, we will not waste polygons on superfluous parts. We will use a texture when there is no noticeable difference between it and a group of performance wasting parts. We will model our aircraft efficiently. If you do not like it, too bad.
3.) We will give you the latest features, but we WILL NOT sacrifice visual accuracy to implement them. Accuracy comes before eye candy.[/font size]

[link:www.sgair.net/FlightFX/|http://www.cableone.net/stewart-glob...gs/sonic1.gif]

[ToddNicholson]

Just not sure why you want to bring this up all again. There are those that definitely feel there is a problem and those that don't. Why upset those that already feel there is a problem by posting this? Ultimately, it gets everyone nowhere. This forum should be used as a more constructive place - not a place to egg people into another flame war.

-Todd

[Erick_Cantu]

I agree, the idea of this post was, I feel the issue has no point...:-)

-E

[font size=1]

FLIGHTFX POLICY

1.) We design for reality, not for idealism.
Thus, you will not see virtual cabins on our aircraft. You can not see inside the real thing anyway, unless you are looking into the sun. You will find virtual cockpits but they will not be visible from outside for the same reason.
2.) We design for people with real computers. Thusly, we will not waste polygons on superfluous parts. We will use a texture when there is no noticeable difference between it and a group of performance wasting parts. We will model our aircraft efficiently. If you do not like it, too bad.
3.) We will give you the latest features, but we WILL NOT sacrifice visual accuracy to implement them. Accuracy comes before eye candy.[/font size]

[link:www.sgair.net/FlightFX/|http://www.cableone.net/stewart-glob...gs/sonic1.gif]

[HG5BFM]

As far as I know, under certain visibility limits you MUST use autoland (CAT III) not to mention the fact that in the DF737 I have no copilot to handle ATC and do things for me (PNF) as in real life. Therefore it's a shame the AP in the DF737 is not as fully implemented as in the PIC767. Otherwise it's a great plane and I just can't wait for DF to release an updated version (including a GMAX model). They have promised to carry on developing this beauty, and I'm sure they will.

Regards,

Peter

[newguy]

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Sep-24-02 AT 09:04PM (EDT)[/font][p]Will all the bs and moaning going on in these forums, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they didn't release a GMAX or an "updated version". This topic has been beaten to death. What would be the point, most of you PIC767er's and whatever else out there would still complain, you would complain about the model and then probably complain about the update.. Where is the incentive for them? You types can't be pleased. I say how about we leave the situation alone, if the product is defective and not up to your realistic standards return it. I have seen Lou offer returns before. (don't want to speak for you Lou, sorry if I am out of line) I for one love the 737 and land by hand. IT's a game for crying out loud!!!!


P.S. Not that I want to see it completely go this way but what the heck... GO General Aviation!!! At least no one is complaining about auto-landing....

[Lou_Betti]

Erick,

Don't waste your time. We at DF have already wasted enough words on this, and MS admitted this AP problem at the AVSIM conference.

Problem aside, it appears not everyone has it any how!

As for me, tomorrow I'll be practicing some more instrument approaches, so I can take my Instrument Proficiency Checkride next month.

Needless to say, on none of these approaches am I allowed to use the AP.

The instructor wants to see that I can fly the plane. ;-)

I want to be sure that I can. My life and that of those flying with me depends on it.

Of course, this is "real" life, not virtual, so I realize that this has little in common with this topic!

Regards,
[link:www.dreamfleet2000.com|http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/im...ORUM_LOUE.jpg]