pzl 104

Doesn't work for me (in FSX). Ctrq+q doesn't raise the seat in the VC, it rotates the view down and it does nothing in the 2D cockpit (default commands)

Looking at the Lear and especially the Concorde 2D panel, the question arises, how do you land with this view without loosing sight of the runway since the cut off angle IRL is usually ~20deg?

Scrolling through these four pages makes me feel like I've stumbled over a thread resurrection, but no, it's an actual 2020, not 2002 thread! ROFL.

I have no idea why are constantly referring to MSFS. I have only stated the fact that sales for the old sims are seriously plummeting way beyond expected levels for a few devs. Nothing else. No need to get insulting.

Looks like you simply can't accept the fact that there are people who actually know more than you do.

Do you believe that any company would be happy if it would be publicly mentioned that they are struggling to survive? Think what you want, but you will notice this 'made up' fact in the coming month/years.

Didn't know that your Warrior panel was a cardboard one without any knobs, that the instruments were flush with the panel, the different items didn't cast any shadows, etc. There still are apparently some people who find 2D panels more enjoyable, but more realistic? No way. If you think that Milviz makes the most realistic VCs then you are looking at the wrong add-on companies and/or flightsims. I really don't understand why some people still claim that VCs are cartoonish etc. while it's already sometimes impossible to distinguish a VC photo from a real cockpit photo. Didn't see a cartoonish one in this video. The last time 2D panels where somewhat more realistic than VCs was when the gauge update rate/resolution in the VC was lower than on a 2D panel.

Why? And I doubt that it's signficantly different for other add-on companies. You will see a noticeable decrease in new releases this year for the old sims.

I know three pretty big aircraft add-on developers and the FSX/P3D/X-plane sales are really plummeting. At least for those three it has become a question of survival until they can start developing for MSFS. Development for the 'old' sims is down to an absolute minimum.

Show me the part in the video where the pilots are looking at e.g. the overhead panel without moving their heads/bodies. I didn't find the part where they were lying on their backs on the cockpit floor so they could see the overhead panel the same 'realistic' way you are. Btw, with the correct/realistic zoom level you don't have to move your head either when you are scanning the instruments and you are looking outside.

Do you realize that TrackIR is used by many users to enhance a simulation. It's not used in real cockpits. You can write lol as often as you like, it doesn't make 2D panels even remotely realistic. No match for a well designed VC in combination with a suitable monitor (and simulator)

It never occured to me that my 'natural human movement' was wrong in the last 17000hrs in various cockpits.

If you start to compare reading text on your phone with working in a cockpit environment, a further discussion doesn't make much sense.

That's new to me. You do need to move your head (and even the whole upper body) to be able to e.g. find/operate switches on the overhead panel. I never got used to TIR either and I still prefer the classic hat switch. Nevertheless VR is simply breathtaking realistic. Presently the only remaining real drawback is IMO the too narrow FOV.

Ever heard of TIR or VR? Especially VR it's exactly as IRL e.g. concerning switch location. Btw, finding a switch on an overhead panel is much more difficult IRL (same in a VC) than on an unrealistic flat 2D overhead panel.

How do you know that 2D is much more realistic since you have apparently never used e.g. FSX, P3D, Aerofly FS2 and DCS?

I have the impression that you have never sat in a real cockpit or flown a real aircraft IRL, since you can't look out of the window and at the instruments at the same time. Being able to look outside and to have the 'vast array of instruments in front of you' is definitely not realistic. Don't know what monitor you are using and what's your viewing distance, but with the correct viewing distance and an acceptable monitor size and format you certainly don't need to zoom out to a 50% setting and even at 100% zoom peripheral vision is still ok. I'm e.g. using a 80% zoom setting which results in a realistic peripheral vision and the correct perception of speed. Btw, I don't know what 2D vs VC has to do with fs9 vs FSX.

Which reasons? You didn't post a single one.

I'm not sure if these are tongue in cheek comments, but I think so since there are simply no flat panels IRL and you usually don't sit at a 90deg angle in front of the panel, except the Ryan NYP. It's absolutely beyond me how someone can call a VC cheesy and cartoonish. Contrary to 2D panels I've seen a lot of VCs which can't be distinguished from real cockpits. 2D panels maybe (still) ok for IFR only trainers without any scenery, but for any other simulation they are real immersion killers. Can't imagine landing any aircraft in an acceptable realistic way with a 2D panel. I'm quite sure that not a single real pilot will agree with your opinion about the stone age 2D panels in a sim.

No, and it doesn't make any sense from the pilots POV in this case.

That's NOT a beta version for the new MSFS, that's just a new FSX beta with a few minor bug fixes and it has absolutely nothing in common with the new sim.

If you are sure that this didn't happen before it's likely that the fuel and/or passenger load has been noticeable reduced. The FSX A321 is a bit overpowered but it's perfectly ok to takeoff IRL and in the sim with full throttle (100%) and it's realistic to exceed the mentioned 350kts in less than a minute, especially at low weight. The approximate acceleration rate on takeoff at the later stage (still on ground!) for most airliners is roughly 10kts per second. Hope this helps

It's not only that quite a few are definitely too fluffy up close. (Some of) the CBs are looking much more like volcanic ash than CBs. Nevertheless I'm not planning to buy any other add-ons than aircraft for MSFS.

Well, still more than 300 days to go until 23rd Dec 2020. Since it's already in testing, it can't be Vaporware.

Sounds like the AP is engaged. Very strange.