Dwaffler

Try going to the Mozilla site for help https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/

Even odder, the user shows he lives in Chile!!!!

it works for those that have pristine Windows systems, and a clean Flight Simulator, with no add-ons added whatsoever. I bet if they added just one add-on, they'd see. And, probably are flying with the keyboard!!!!

The first RCAF CC-295 was just delivered in Sept of this year, they are getting (or have recieved) this second one supposedly in November. The Canadian government ordered them back in 2016

That's weird you've been able to get that to work. I've tried repeatedly to get that to work on mine, and have been very very lucky to get my aircraft to park where the coded parking was set for. I'll tell the ATC to go to gates, and it will send my plane to a gate. But, when I look at the assignment of the gate, more often than not it's not coded the same as the plane. But, I don't worry about that really. If I really was concerned, the above steps I laid out guaranteed the spot assigned would get me to where I should have been

As someone who's been doing the flight simulators since the subLogic days, I have found that getting the newest and supposedly greatest simulator is always going to have it's teething problems. I was a hardened FS2004 guy for many years, I swore at one point I would never get FSX. I read all the problems, all the gripes, and thought, I'll just sit here and fly my FS2004. Plus, my machine couldn't handle that anyways. Fast forward 3 years, and I get a system the can handle FSX and I installed it and thought what the heck and tried it. Took my a while to get used to flying with a virtual cockpit, the movements within the cockpit when taking off, the navigating around the cockpit while flying. I didn't care for it at first, but then it grew on me, and I wondered why I hadn't flown virtual cockpits before. My FSX isn't on the best system, but it works, and does exactly what I expect. Have I had problems with it, sure I have. But the majority of the times, I've looked into myself outside the forums. A couple of times, I've mentioned a problem to the forum, and have gotten great responses, usually followed by a "duh" moment in my own head when I read their responses. Will I go to MSFS, probably not. I have way to much invested with FSX, and I'm very happy with it. I have seen some great videos of it, and looks very nice. But, I'm more of an IFR flier, flying above 30,000 ft, so all the great scenery wouldn't do really anything for me. Plus, I've been doing alot of my own things within FSX, creating military AI traffic, updating military bases (I'm a 12-year veteran of the US Navy, and was a jet engine mechanic on fighters and ASW aircraft), and even recently bringing back some old bases that were either closed or abandoned. All the while, having a blast doing so. Now, for those who post about their problems in MSFS. Yes, the software has problems, all software do in it's first year or two. I know, I used to work for a major software company and supported those products that came out, some with some bugs nobody expected. But, bashing the program saying it's crap doesn't do you or the program any justice. I very rarely buy a new program within the first 2 years of it coming out, (especially the FS series) because it's going to have teething problems right out of the box. It's common knowledge around the world about software (see Windows OS's). It's going to take a few patches to get it where it needs to be. Take a step back to what you were flying, relax and let things smooth out if you don't like it now. Simple. Now, for those commenting on those poor souls having issues, be polite and stop being condescending. The old line of "it works fine on my machine" gets very old when you see it. Sure it works fine on your machine, but the other person just might have a system that's fully capable of running it, but it could be a driver, hardware incompatibilty, bad-damaged-corrupt file, who knows what their problem could be. But, they came on here for help, and that's what they should get. Don't try to make your system better than anybody else, you wouldn't like it if someone did that to you, would you?

Got through the survey without problems here, very good survey!!

The atc_parking_code entry in the aircraft.cfg file doesn't work with a user controlled aircraft, it only works with AI aircraft. You would have to get a program like ADE (Airport Design Editor) and change the properties of the gates or parking spots you are looking to designate at each airport. You would have to make those areas something that FS can differentiate from the other spots, and something that you can select to park at when you land, or place your aircraft before you fly. Something like "north parking", that would show in the menu when they need to go to, or be placed at parking.

If you are going to replace a panel with a plane from Posky, make sure you keep the Posky panel stuff with your newly installed panel. I think one of them is called Posky Debug, and there's another one as well. Those panel addons with the Posky planes has some features that help the plane, like with wing flex, and landing gear/nose wheel steering. I found out about that many years ago, when I replaced a panel in one of their 747's, and found I couldn't steer the thing, let alone get it to move. Once I troubleshot the thing down to those, I added those to the panel I was adding to fly with, and the plane flew and drove fine.

Well, you do know that Project Opensky and Project Airbus groups have gone by the wayside many years back. Personally, I still fly with quite a few of the Project Opensky/Airbus aircraft, and have had very few problems with them, especially when it came to the 737 series and the baby Buses. I think (and please correctly me if I'm wrong) the some of the people who were with Project Opensky had now gone to TDS, which you see that have made quite a few of the 737 and 757, and even the 787's. Many of the Project Opensky/Airbus aircraft were made for FS2004, and had to be modded to fly well with even FSX. So, I really hope you are not trying to fly these models on FS2020, you going to be heavily disappointed in them.

Question is, do you know a plane that CAN fly at Mach 4, I don't. I don't even think the SR-71 could reach that

Try opening up the GPS gauge and see how the plane is flying it. The current leg will be highlighted pink. It almost sounds like you've got an extra waypoint in the plan, or the plane is flying past a waypoint, but not close enough to it that it's not tripping to the the next leg. If it's the first, just take out that waypoint from your flight plan. If the second is what's happening, the plane will fly circles around the waypoint, trying to get close enough to it to trip to the next leg. I've had that happen to me a couple of times, especially on take offs. i stray off the plan enough because the tower wants me to fly 'runway heading', then they will tell me to turn to..... and proceed, only to find out the waypoint we just far enough away that the plane started to circle around. I was able to get into the GPS and tell the plane to fly to the next waypoint. In cases where I have a crazy departure, I will set the GPS and NAV on about 30 seconds or so after I takeoff, and let the plane find it's way.

The major airports may not have enough, or any gates for the airliners to park at. If there is some, they might be to small for the plane to park at, in which case the airplane just disappears after landing. Almost all the airports that Microsoft put into FSX had the right sizes for THEIR AI traffic to park. But, when you start adding third party AI traffic to the mix, all AI became affected.

Since about 95% of my flying is IFR flying, I don't see any reason to buy FS2020. I've been flying FSX for the last 8 years, and have way to much time and money spent in getting things for FSX to give it up now. It took me a while to go from FS9 to FSX, but I'm very happy with FSX now. I do like what I've seen in videos of FS2020 for the scenery in folks that fly low and slow, but I'm more of a long distance and high flyer!!!

I have the QW757 and I think it's a wonderful plane to fly. But, if you notice, the planes you mention about a 'study level' are only planes that are still in production. You also don't notice the A300 and A310 aren't being made up this way either. But, I have to ask, what more are you looking for? I have the Aerosoft A320, and haev recently decided to stop using it, because it was more of a hassle to input the flight plan into the FMC, mainly the fact that the plane wouldn't accept the amount of passengers I was trying to load. Even following step by step in the manual, and it still wouldn't load it. Mind you I have had two flights in it, where everything worked, and it did fly very nice. But, after spending 6+ days trying to figure out what was going on, I went back to my trusty Project Airbus A320 and had a wonderful flight again. Sometimes, the extras really aren't worth it in my eyes!!

One of the first things I would look at would be the Event Viewer. There's probably something there in the Applications log that would indicate a problem.

When flying the C-17, give her lots of space when trying to land. I fly this aircraft alot for a virtual militaty group, and she is one of my favorites. When coming into an airport, get yourself aligned with the runway and setup about 10 miles, out, about 3000ft above the runway elevation, and have yourself setup at about 150kts and flap set up about 10 degrees. Once you past 10 miles, start a decent, going at about 700 to 800fpm. Getting near the airport at about 5 miles, add some more flaps, drop you speed to be about 135-140kts, and keep your eyes on the PAPI lights on the runway. Never let your speed drop below 130. Make little corrections as you come in, nothing jerky, she will bite you every time. I use the autopilot to bring her in, allowing me to make the little corrections. Once you get to about 1-2 miles, take over the control, but still be very gentle with her. If you don't like the setup, go around. But, this is the way I bring her in when I fly her.

I even checked iFly's site for you and couldn't find one either. Since Air Force One is actually a 747-200, (VC-25 in Air Force titles), they probably wont have one. But, iFly did come out with a 747-8, as an add-on for the 747-400, maybe someone will come up with a paint for the new Air Force One :)

Make sure you know the barometric pressure at the airport before setting up for a landing. Check the ATIS for the airport as soon as you can get it, even check surrounding airports. BTW, you did know that Mexico City's airport is at 7300 ft in elevation!!

I know CLS has a KC-10 in their package with their DC-10. I've had it for many years, and use to fly that plane for the Virtual US Air Force. I love flying that plane when I used to get a chance, but since leaving the group, haven't flown her at all

I've even heard it will make your chair, or what ever you use to sit on while flying, move, shake and even make you fall out of it when you go upside down if you're not belted onto it. And if you happen to have a hard landing, it will injure you. And, in the event of a crash, well, hope your life insurance will be up to date!!! :)

My favorite all time airport will always be the Akron-Canton Airport (KCAK), just outside of Canton, Ohio. I grew up near there, and flew into that airport a few times while coming home on leave from the US Navy. My father took me to the airport when I was little, and there used to be an outside area on top of the terminal where we could watch the planes come and go. That was back in the early 70's. Other airports that will always be special to me will be the two NAS's that I was stationed in from the early 80's to the early 90's, NAS (now MCAS) Miramar (KNKX) and NAS North Island (KNZY). I spent 8 years at Miramar with two different F-14 Tomcat squadrons, and I spent 3.5 years at North Island while serving duty with the S-3 Viking training squadron. Plus, North Island was also where I met my wife, her and I worked on the S-3's together!!! :)

Got to love the registration on the first plane, D-ODGY, Dodgy!!!! :)

I find that you have to open the original airport in ADE, and save it as an .xml file. Then you can open the .xml file in an xml editor and make the changes there. Save the file back to an .xml file, then open the file in ADE from the open as an .xml and you can then save it back to the .bgl format, after any changes you want to make it in. You will want to make changes to the original airport file though, take out all the scenery that might carry over though, such as runways, taxiways, buildling, taxi signs. Because those will still carry over to you new airport, giving you double scenery I have done this with a couple of airport to revive some old Naval Air Stations in the US, some that have had their codes changed from what they had as NAS's. I've had to open the original file, remove everything, except for the dot for the center of the airport. Then, once I made the changes to the new airport, I saved it with the new ICAO code and it was done. But, any traffic you may have might still be using the old ICAO code might have troubles. New traffic with the updated code should work fine, but the old traffic with the old code might have problems!!

Looks like they are back offline. Tried to fly a flight i picked over the weekend, and the software kept asking me to log in. When I went to thw ebpage, it comes back up with the 503 - service is unavailable error again