Best Flight simulator?

[mapuc]

What is the best flight simulator when it comes to:

Civilian flight simulator?
Here I'm thinking of airplanes from the beginning to now

Military flight simulator in:
WWI?
WWII?
1945- to now?

Markus

[Red October1984]

For Civilian Flight, I hear that FSX is among the best. I haven't played it. I play FS2004

For Combat,

IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 has mods that allow it to do WW1, Korea, Vietnam, and fictional battles along with WW2.

For Modern Combat, I hear Falcon 4.0 and DCS are both among the best.


Hope this answers your question. :yeah:

[mapuc]

Thank you Red.

I had a few flight simulator games to my old computer(XP)

one of them was civilian I think it was Microsoft Flight Simulator 2007/8

I also had one from WWII in the pacific

One that I could chose from F-16 or F-18

Had also a very old games from my Win98
F-15
IDF(not sure if it's the correct name.)

I miss my flight simulator, That's why I'm asking you

Markus

[Red October1984]

I miss my flight simulator, That's why I'm asking you

What I personally recommend for you:

Civilian- Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 or X. X is an updated version of 2004 basically

Combat- IL-2 Sturmovik 1946. This game (with mods) covers the 20th century all the way up to the 70's. You can't go wrong with it. :woot:

[Sailor Steve]

For WW1 it's probably Over Flanders Fields or Rise Of Flight. I haven't played either one yet because of my dreadfully old computer, but I've read all the literature and seen the videos.

ROF is by all accounts the better "flying" experience, being capable of full flight dynamics including torque and wind problems. Just keeping the plane in the air can be a challenge, so you'd better have a good stick and pedal setup. The bad news is that it's designed for online play, so there is no real campaign system, or so I've heard.

OFF is supposed to be simpler and easier. It's a complete rewrite of Microsoft's Combat Flight Sim 3, so you'll have to get a copy of that first. The good news is that they're very cheap these days. The other asset of OFF is a complete campaign system, similar to but improving on the one in Red Baron.

[Skybird]

What is the best flight simulator when it comes to:
Civilian flight simulator?
Here I'm thinking of airplanes from the beginning to now

* FSX or P3D (continued developement on FSX) for complex airliner addons á la PMDG, and also some small plane addons á la RealAir.

* There also is X-Plane. The airliner addpons cannpot competre so far with FSX' addon landscape, both visually and in terms of realsim, as far as I know and see. PMDG looks much better in FSX than airliners addons for X-P. FSX also has more and better-looking airport scenery addons and region scenery addons. As an example, Aerosoft's truly outstanding Balearix Islands:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yc1ZeQx3Jc



* For Soaring: Condor. Old, but the best on the matter. Not as easy as you might think, physically very realistic, thermals, ridge and wave soaring - its there. Photorealistic scenery addons available.Since it is so much unknown, this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxyGRhsYkUw

Military flight simulator in:
WWI?

* Rise of Flight

WWII?
* Wings of Victory: Battle of Britain II (older title, but very challenging flight model, you need the latest upgrade by the mod coimmunity, IL-2 has toy-like flightmodels, compared to this)

* DCS's P-51 Mustang

* Several WWII-plane modules for FSX

1945- to now?

* Of course Falcon 4.0.
* And DCS A-10C.

[Red October1984]

OFF is supposed to be simpler and easier. It's a complete rewrite of Microsoft's Combat Flight Sim 3, so you'll have to get a copy of that first. The good news is that they're very cheap these days. The other asset of OFF is a complete campaign system, similar to but improving on the one in Red Baron.

I forgot about CFS 3. That's another good one but in my experience modding is complicated and frustrating.

It's not to be overlooked but if you can figure out how to install the mods it makes for a good game. :up:

[Father Goose]

Falcon 4.0 has my vote for the best. Very realistic. :up:
FSX is a good sim as well if you have a fast processor.

I need to fly Falcon more. "So many sims...so little time." :hmmm:

[Oberon]

H'okay.

Civilian:
FSX - Xplane is very good and up and coming, but doesn't quite have the legacy backing that FSX does, however I'd definitely keep an eye on it. FSX has the upper hand with the PMDG series and Accusim series which put the 'sim' in simulator as Skybird will attest to. :yep:

WWI:
Rise of Flight/Over Flanders Fields - I'd put both ROF and OFF at level pegging. I haven't played OFF since phase 2 (it's one phase 4 now IIRC) but it was quite compelling back then. What OFF lacks in graphics it makes up for in immersion. Rise of Flight is stunning, but the campaign is a bit stiff and there's just something not quite there. It's hard to explain, but it's a critique which has been levelled at quite a few simulators that have come out from the East of Europe over the past few years.
The primary advantage that ROF has over OFF aside from graphics is the price, OFF is quite expensive and (possibly) requires Combat Flight Simulator 3 (you'd have to check on that to be sure, they might have weaned it from it by now) whereas Rise of Flight can be downloaded for free with two aircraft and you just pay for whatever aircraft you fancy to fly. The AI aircraft are all there to battle against from the start.

WWII:
Battle of Britain II: Wings of Victory - Without question the best simulation of the Battle of Britain ever made. It's primary drawback is that it lacks multiplayer and the graphics are a little dated, but it makes up for it in leaps and bounds in every other area. The primary draw is the ability for the sim to model hundreds of aircraft in the sky at the same time, something that most simulators struggle with. When you come out of cloud at Angels 15 to see a whole box of He-111s in front of you with Spitfires and Bf-109s swirling around like mosquitos above it, then you get an idea of the scale of the battle in 1940. There's also a very in-depth campaign that you can fly in. Highly recommended and still being updated by a dedicated mod community that have done terrific things to it (including putting in every single squadron and staffels individual paint scheme, so if you recognise Adolf Gallands paint scheme on a 109, chances are that's the sim's Adolf Galland that you're running away from).

IL-2 1946 - Dated, the vanilla has some very questionable flight models and the AI is a cheating bastard, BUT, it's a very capable online engine and the scale of the theatres and aircraft in the 'sim' is unrivalled. If you want to fly in the Pacific for one mission and over Berlin the next, you can do that. If you want to do it with friends from all over the world, you can do that too. The TD patches are essential and you'll really want to get one of the modpacks, we currently use HSFX, and I recommend that.

Cold War/Modern:
Falcon 4.0 BMS - The original Falcon 4.0 updated for a modern era, it's graphically beautiful but has by no means been dumbed down. The campaign is very well made, one of the best in the sim world, and the AI is no slouch at all. The downside? Getting a copy of the original Falcon 4.0 became an expensive exercise as soon as BMS came out, on ebay copies can range from $40-100 which is rather steep for such an old game, but if you have a copy of the old Falcon, it's well worth getting BMS.

DCS Black Shark/A-10C - Beautiful and brutal. Like Falcon 4.0, this is something you'll spend a lot of time reading manuals for, likewise watching tutorials. The Black Shark is a little bit easier to work with than the A10C (In my opinion anyway) but be prepared to curse Kamovs twin rotor design a lot as they suddenly decide to interact with each other in a manner that you did not intend them to. DCS World is free and comes with a Frogfoot, so you can get an idea of the flight region, but the Frogfoot (like the Flaming Cliffs aircraft) is not up to the standard of the A10/Black Shark/Huey in terms of clickable equipment and detail. The downside is that like Rise of Flight, the single player is a bit...bland...compared to the likes of Falcon 4.0, but graphically it's beautiful and as a sim it's top notch. Avoid Flaming Cliffs though, the aircraft are beautiful and nice to fly online, but they have a nasty habit of rereleasing it as an updated version periodically and making the new DCS World completely incompatible with the older versions. For example, FC2 and Black Shark 1 are both outdated with the current DCS World...hopefully this is something that won't happen any more now that they've got DCS World sorted, but it's still something that caused a bit of upset in the Flightsim world (not that it takes much).

[mapuc]

I'm very glad for all of your advice on which flight simulator is the best

It's really hard to chose

I'm however been thinking on FS2004 and some of it's addons

And to the military

Falcon 4
Lock on 4

Haven't really found a flight Sim from WWI and WWII

Have found a homepage where you can buy things that makes you Sim funnier

Here what I'm thinking of

Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals
Saitek Pro Flight Yoke System

Guess that is what I need to the civilian flight Sims

To the military flight Sims I going to chose this
Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog Flightstick

Markus

[Red October1984]

To the military flight Sims I going to chose this
Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog Flightstick

There's also a Warthog gaming chair. :D

These things are at the top of my "One of These Days-Simulator Edition" list. :rotfl2:

They look so awesome. I played P3D the other day with a yoke and pedals and it's easily the most comfortable flight sim I played. :yep:

[Oberon]

Push those one space down the list and put TrackIR at the top, especially if you're going to fly military. Be sure to get the vector expansion too.

[Red October1984]

Push those one space down the list and put TrackIR at the top, especially if you're going to fly military. Be sure to get the vector expansion too.

TrackIR looks pretty cool...but I'd have to try one out first before I buy.

Yeah, the Kinect tries the same thing with your whole body and it sucks. I'm not entirely convinced... :hmmm:

[johan_d]

Look at www.avsim.com for flightsim fs2004 and x details.

[domfliss]

I'd have to say X-Plane 10. FSX is like an fat hag with silicon. Not attractive and very slow, LOL.

[Dowly]

TrackIR looks pretty cool...but I'd have to try one out first before I buy.

Unless you have somekind of condition that prevents you from moving your head,
there's no reason to hold back, a must have.


Regarding BoB II, didnt see anyone mention it, but it has one of the best AIs
I have seen in a flight sim. :yep:

[Julhelm]

I used to play a ton of Strike Fighters. Can't go wrong with it if you like Vietnam-era.

[Herr-Berbunch]

For civvy stuff then I'd go FSX, particularly with some of the addons like REX and GEX. I've not seen enough of X-Plane 10 to comment on this, X-plane always looked good but I found my version (8) not very user friendly.

For military stuff, definitely RoF, and if you've a lot of time on your hands then the DCS stuff is sublime. It's great but it's definitely not a 'just jump in' sim.

Also, for any flight sim TrackIR is a must - but only if you can't get FreeTrackNoIR working first. Seems daft to pay for something when something very nearly as good might work. It didn't for me so I got TIR and it makes cockpit life sooooo much easier.

Check out this sticked thread in the Helosim.com and Flight Sims section -http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=115971 :yep:

[Skybird]

Unless you have somekind of condition that prevents you from moving your head,
there's no reason to hold back, a must have.:
I totally agree, a must have.

[Skybird]

i just gave xplane 9 for android a try. and i got positively surprised. while it is self-explanatory how a tablet necessarily demands concessions and sets limits, they really managed to squeeze an optimum of effect from the platform, a galaxy note 10.1 in my case. they marked the scores possible for a flightsim on tablet, and did so with an unexpected amount of user friendliness. for sta standard of tablets: nice!

[Herr-Berbunch]

i just gave xplane 9 for android a try. and i got positively surprised. while it is self-explanatory how a tablet necessarily demands concessions and sets limits, they really managed to squeeze an optimum of effect from the platform, a galaxy note 10.1 in my case. they marked the scores possible for a flightsim on tablet, and did so with an unexpected amount of user friendliness. for sta standard of tablets: nice!

That's good to hear, the wife collected hers yesterday. Not sure if she'd appreciate me sticking games on it though! :hmmm:

[Skybird]

Cool features in there. For Android, the app is free and comes with I think 6 regions and 5 or six planes, smaller sports planes.Other regions and planes cost 70 cents per buy. I think that is a fair model.

I plan to invest in one soaring plane, one WWII propeller plane, and maybe the Grand Canyon region. The game seems to allow a little dogfighting, and I read good news about the soaring in x-plane. These things actually may make things that bit more interesting as is needed to make you coming back to a flightsim on a tablet.

Just do not make the mistake and compare it to a PC sim. Additionally to be misleading, it also would not be fair.

[Skybird]

Another positive Android surprise:

http://xtremesoaring3d.com/

Test description at the very bottom of the screen. Scroll down.

Very surprising how well it works! Very good app, reminds me quite a bit of Condor.


Did some dogfighting in X-Plane, and got shot out of the sky. Nice. There is really some challenge, last but not least due to the gyroscopic steering, which is unusual and makes it pretty much fun during extreme manouvers. :) I see no need to invest much money in x-Plane, but three or four planes is okay. I bought a P-51, a glider, a 787 and an F-22. So: one plane for every opportunity.

[mapuc]

The games comes almost cheap so I can buy FS2004 and FSX

Together they cost about 46 $

Falcon 4.0 cost about 9 $
Haven't found the price for the rest of the flight Sims. ok they cost almost nothing It's the gear that cost a lot

The Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals cost about 150 $
The Saitek Pro Flight Yoke System cost about 158 $
The Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog Flight stick cost about 515 $

To start with, it will be some cheap joystick.

Markus

[Red October1984]

To start with, it will be some cheap joystick.

I've got a Logitech Wingman Force 3D.

It's old as dirt but it's dependable. The only thing that's gone wrong with it is that my rudder twist is a little screwy.

I recommend it to anybody. It works even after like 10 years. :yeah:

[Skybird]

these days it is pointless to run both fs9 and fsx. if your rig can comfortably handle it, go for fsx. if it cannot, go for fs9. it took fsx some years to mature, but now the addon situation for it is better than for fs9. if fsx, make sure you get the full pack, acceleration or whatever it is called. there is patch code in it that is essent ial for many addons.


we have a saying over here. buy too cheap, and you buy twice. consider to invest in ch gear. both fighterstick and prothrottle. god equipment for any flightsim and diverse enough to serve in any other button-pushing stuff as well. also, arguably the best programming software out there, allowing for detail and diversity, but being extremely easy in handling. tester often say it is the most efficnet interface on the market, while being the easiest and most ergonomic at the same time.

[mapuc]

Skybird.

Of course I could chose one of them, but many say that FS2004 is the best and many say that FSX is the best.

But I guess I have to chose one of them either way

Markus

[Skybird]

Skybird.

Of course I could chose one of them, but many say that FS2004 is the best and many say that FSX is the best.

But I guess I have to chose one of them either way

Markus

i was one of those saying fs2004 is better for ifr and fsx better for vfr. that reflected stability and availability of complex aircraft addons. however, the situation i based on when thinking like that, no longer exists in that way. mind you, we are living in year 7 after after fsx release. it has addons that simply do not exist for fs2004 but exceed fs2004 addons in quality and complexity. i stiuck with fs2004 until two years ago or so. but i then realised that fsx simply has moved beyond fs2004 then.

you should consider an alternatice. if you buy both sims anyway, you should use that money instead and buy Prepar3d by Lockheed. They have bought the rights from Microsoft for FSX, and develope it further. It looks like FSX, but performs like FS2004 on todays hardware, meaning you get more frames (most people report that) and greater stability. P3D is the future. FSX are mostly compatible, and most major developers support it anyway now. Cost is 50 euros for student license.

Google it. I also posted and had threads about it in fs forum of subsim. When i do my next manual system reinstallation, i will migrate myself to p3d, too.

[Red October1984]

i was one of those saying fs2004 is better for ifr and fsx better for vfr. that reflected stability and availability of complex aircraft addons. however, the situation i based on when thinking like that, no longer exists in that way. mind you, we are living in year 7 after after fsx release. it has addons that simply do not exist for fs2004 but exceed fs2004 addons in quality and complexity. i stiuck with fs2004 until two years ago or so. but i then realised that fsx simply has moved beyond fs2004 then.

you should consider an alternatice. if you buy both sims anyway, you should use that money instead and buy Prepar3d by Lockheed. They have bought the rights from Microsoft for FSX, and develope it further. It looks like FSX, but performs like FS2004 on todays hardware, meaning you get more frames (most people report that) and greater stability. P3D is the future. FSX are mostly compatible, and most major developers support it anyway now. Cost is 50 euros for student license.

Google it. I also posted and had threads about it in fs forum of subsim. When i do my next manual system reinstallation, i will migrate myself to p3d, too.

I can agree with P3D.

The Aerostar Yak-52 pilots had a trailer with P3D Simulators at the air show last weekend.

P3D is awesome. :rock:

[Herr-Berbunch]

X-plane are all 'were used by company X, Y, and Z' including Lockheed Martin. That confuses me a bit when LM have Prepar3d.

[Red October1984]

X-plane are all 'were used by company X, Y, and Z' including Lockheed Martin. That confuses me a bit when LM have Prepar3d.

Seems like everything is owned by Boeing in some way anyway. :hmmm:

P3D is not a bad sim at all. I'd buy it. :rock:

[Herr-Berbunch]

If I didn't have FSX it'd be higher on my list, not that I use FSX much nowadays.

[Red October1984]

If I didn't have FSX it'd be higher on my list, not that I use FSX much nowadays.

I should look at getting FSX. :hmmm:

I was able to run the demo just fine. I'm currently a FS2004 man. And my childhood was full of playing that, FS2002, CFS3, and various Star Wars games.

[Herr-Berbunch]

Don't get it until you've a decent rig to run it on. FSX is a notorious CPU hog and 2.2 GHz and crappy card (no offence) will make you wish you hadn't bothered.

All my posts replying to you recently all seem to add up to the same conclusion. Sell a kidney and spend the money wisely. :D

[Skybird]

X-plane are all 'were used by company X, Y, and Z' including Lockheed Martin. That confuses me a bit when LM have Prepar3d.
You seem to mistake it a bit. LM does not say they use it for advertiozing or just show it around - thex actively optimised the code left by MS and tweak it to make better use of more modern hardware. They actively develope the code and platform, and established a business model for the professional versions of it. It looks like FSX, but it performs much better, therefore, and also many people for whom FSx was unstable und who were unable to even run it now report that P3D gives them a stable, smooth experience - with graphics maxed out and frames as high as with FS9 on modern hardware.

That'S why I say P3D is the way to go. Aerosoft is the world'S biggest distributor of flightsim stuff now, and when they have embarked on P3D and give it special info service for their products, and new reeases explicitly advertise with being P3D compatible, this should serve as a hint for you. These days you do not buy FSX anymore, you buy P3D. On the same rig: same looks olike FSX, but much better performance, using modern hardware, optimised code, closed holes that MS did not care for.

This is especially important considering that FSX still uses only one core, and has that damn inbuilt 3.9 GB RAM limit (your 64Bit OS has nothing to do with that, the sim just cannot use more than 3.9 or 3.7 GB, it is 32 Bit hardcoded).

Considering that even latest systems can barely handle FSX with visuals maxed out and many addons running, these improvements are vital, I'd say. With PMDG and weather and airport addons, I do not even bother install a decent traffic addon oin my FSX, for example. With P3D, I would be very optimistic that my rig could handle thzat additionally, too. When running FSX now, halöf of my RAM stays unused (8GB), and two of four cores are almost idle), the third runs Windows and other stuff, the foruth runs FSX plus addons. Should not be like that. But you can solve that only with P3D.

[Red October1984]

Don't get it until you've a decent rig to run it on. FSX is a notorious CPU hog and 2.2 GHz and crappy card (no offence) will make you wish you hadn't bothered.

All my posts replying to you recently all seem to add up to the same conclusion. Sell a kidney and spend the money wisely. :D

How was I able to run the FSX demo then? :hmmm:

[Skybird]

You're a zombie, apparently, that's how. :D

[Red October1984]

You're a zombie, apparently, that's how. :D

Wow....I was not aware of that.

Thanks Skybird! :arrgh!:

----

:D

Was gifted B-17 Flying Fortress The Mighty Eighth on GoG today.

I love how in-depth and detailed this sim is. I can't wait to play it. It'll probably be around tomorrow... I played a trial of it at one point. This is going to suck up a lot of my time in the coming weeks. Nothing better than a complete simulation of my favorite bomber of all time.

Thanks Raptor1 and that generous 3$*

*Again...I cannot repay you by selling my soul. :doh:

[mapuc]

@ Skybird, Even I have dl the FSX demo and it runs smoothly even though I just have a 64 Mb graphic card and about 2 Ghz cpu.

@ Red, how could I forget that game B-17 a great game I played it on my old
Win 98. It have been awhile since I dropped bombs on Berlin.

Looking for a demo or trail of Prepar3D

Markus

[Red October1984]

@ Red, how could I forget that game B-17 a great game I played it on my old
Win 98. It have been awhile since I dropped bombs on Berlin.

Was it TME or was it the original? I have the original one on DOSBox but it was always unplayable because of the difficulty, graphics, and no manual. :03: I've been reading the manual for TME for a while now.

Looking for a demo or trail of Prepar3D

If you find one, send me the link.

[Herr-Berbunch]

Sky - I didn't say that LM use it for advertising, X-plane highlight that their users include Nasa and LM amongst others.

[Skybird]

I misinterpreted then what you said. I thought you meant that P3D was just another way to say "our fabulous sim is used by the pros like LM!"

Seems to have been completely my own fault, sorry.

Mapuc, what are your ingame graphcis settings and options, resolution, cloud options? AI traffic? I do not assume you use heavy addon airports? PMDG aircraft modules? When I launch FSX, I have external weather, external weather control, external airport modules, external aircraft modules, external landscape modelling.

And when I had a Pentium 4 at 2.8 GHz in 2007 and first time bought FSX then, I had stuttery performance on even low resolution and details. I then decided to engage for years to come on FS2004 instead. Just two years ago or so I migrated to FSX, mainly because of the PMDG737NGX.

If you want to use complex addon stuff - and without that FSX to me is not worth much, but is a simple toy only - you need a system not only running the base installation well, but has resources left to spend for that addon stuff. The default planes just do not compare to good addon planes. The default airports, even the highly detailed ones, do not compare to good airport addons. The default weather does not compare to good weather addons' rendering and visualization.

[mapuc]

Was it TME or was it the original? I have the original one on DOSBox but it was always unplayable because of the difficulty, graphics, and no manual. :03: I've been reading the manual for TME for a while now.



If you find one, send me the link.

If I'm not remembering it wrong, it came in a box-Like SHII. The disc was in a hard cd cover and there was a manual - How to install, missions campaign(s) and wich keys to steer the Mighty B-17( I had a little joystick with only one button)

When you wrote "The original one on DOSbox, I had to make a search, because I started to wonder if it was the original game I had(I bougth in one of our local computer store

Here are what I found

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-17_Flying_Fortress:_The_Mighty_8th

I bought my copy in 2004-5 for a very cheap dime.

Markus

[Dowly]

You can buy TME from GoG.com for $5.99:
http://www.gog.com/gamecard/b_17_flying_fortress_the_mighty_8th

:salute:

[mapuc]

Mapuc, what are your ingame graphcis settings and options, resolution, cloud options? AI traffic? I do not assume you use heavy addon airports? PMDG aircraft modules? When I launch FSX, I have external weather, external weather control, external airport modules, external aircraft modules, external landscape modelling.


:oops: I have a very weak ingame computer, so the game I'm going to buy has to be at the lowest settings but that's only to the day I get a better computer. A stationary and not like now a laptop.

Guess I was a little to fast when asking wich flight sims is the best, maybe I should have got a MUCH better computer before asking.

Markus

[Red October1984]

You can buy TME from GoG.com for $5.99:
http://www.gog.com/gamecard/b_17_flying_fortress_the_mighty_8th

:salute:

It was $2.99 during the sale...That's when Raptor gifted it to me. :D

It's a pretty good sim if I say so myself. :yeah:

[Dowly]

Yeah, it's good. Only problem I had with it years ago when I last played it was
the MG sound cutting off after few rounds and CTDs.

[mapuc]

A little to late, I have noticed that I have posted my question in the wrong section.

I knew, but had forgot that we have a flight Sim section.(I do not or it's on very rare occasion that I scroll all the way down)

Markus

[Pisces]

Sopwith Camel
http://s.uvlist.net/l/y2010/05/70718.jpg

[mapuc]

Sopwith Camel
http://s.uvlist.net/l/y2010/05/70718.jpg

Amiga or Vic20?

Markus

[Red October1984]

Yeah, it's good. Only problem I had with it years ago when I last played it was
the MG sound cutting off after few rounds and CTDs.

Haven't had any CTD's yet...

Didn't notice the MG sound. I'll try that out soon. I'm almost over Germany. :03:

[Dowly]

Haven't had any CTD's yet...

Didn't notice the MG sound. I'll try that out soon. I'm almost over Germany. :03:

Could be that GoG crew fixed the issues then. :up:

[Schroeder]

I'm almost over Germany. :03:
I'll be waiting for you. Muhahahahah.
http://foto.arcor-online.net/palb/alben/54/1012554/3131386162626230.jpg



(that picture wasn't taken by me and it's not me on it...just stole it from the Internetz):cool:

[Red October1984]

Could be that GoG crew fixed the issues then. :up:

Doubt it since the game just CTD'd

I'll be waiting for you. Muhahahahah.

You and your flak caused my CTD! :stare:

[mapuc]

If you find one, send me the link.
Edit
Made a search for Prepar3D demo and found many pages the first page that had something that looked like a demo was a dead-end page :stare: Made more search and found a page that worked dl the demo tried to installed it, without success it seems that my registry haven't got any FSX. Made some search on this fsx. Haha the demo was not prepar3D it was Flight Sim X

Guess there ain't no demo or trial version of it.

Markus

[Red October1984]

Edit
Made a search for Prepar3D demo and found many pages the first page that had something that looked like a demo was a dead-end page :stare: Made more search and found a page that worked dl the demo tried to installed it, without success it seems that my registry haven't got any FSX. Made some search on this fsx. Haha the demo was not prepar3D it was Flight Sim X

Guess there ain't no demo or trial version of it.

I had the FSX demo at one point. It was kinda enjoyable...but I have FS2004....sooo yeah.

Don't need it yet.

[mapuc]

My memory isn't going well. Don't know why I had forgot this story from irl and flight Sims

As I told you before I had Microsoft flight some 2007 or 2008

I wrote about my purchase on a danish forums

One of my on line friend Steve(don't know if that was his real name or an alias) made not only a comment about it, he even send me a pm and asked me if I want to play Flight Sim on-line with him as a co-pilot

Wrote back that I'm really new to this have just learn how to use my keyboard

that's a start he replied, I'll guide you through the game play
When he wrote that, my first was he's a real hard-core flight Sim player.

I joined his network(forgot what it's called.)

Let's start with some easy flying, let us fly from Copenhagen to Billund with a little commercial plane(can't remember which)

The flight toke about 50 minutes and during the flight he told me what to do and what the saying from control-tower meant a.s.o

a little week late I got an pm from him, were he asked my if I had the guts to try a long flight

Of course I replied

He replied before we start I want you to fix coffee, the or chocolate, water and make Sim sandwiches, ´cause it's going to be long flight

I did as he said I should

Made Sim coffee and had some cola and a few sandwiches

The flight was from London to New York in a 747

During our flight we had a lot of chit chat

I asked him what he did for a living

Nothing special- I'm airline pilot flying with SAS

My response? :o:o

He was really a pilot I met him about 4-6 month later.

I remember my thought about that. I thought that a real life pilot that flew for real had no time or was not interested in flight Sims.

I was wrong.

So that's my story- I haven't seen or heard from Steve since middle of 2010

Markus

[Red October1984]

Awesome story mapuc.

I've always wanted to do flight sim multiplayer like that. :woot:

[Red October1984]

GUESS WHO CAN START B-17 ENGINES!?!?!

THAT'S RIGHT!

ME!

:woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot:


I FEEL LIKE SUCH A BADASS FOR DOING SUCH A COMMON TASK! :arrgh!:

[Pisces]

Amiga or Vic20?

MarkusI guess PC with CGA video output

[Oberon]

GUESS WHO CAN START B-17 ENGINES!?!?!

THAT'S RIGHT!

ME!

:woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot:


I FEEL LIKE SUCH A BADASS FOR DOING SUCH A COMMON TASK! :arrgh!:

Now...let's see if I can do this from memory...

1) Switch inverter to alternate flow and check voltage on each battery
2) Activate Hydraulics pump and get Hydraulics pressure up to spec
3) Magnetos on
4) Cowl flaps to 75%
5) Intercoolers to cold
6) Fuel to Rich
7) Unlock control column and rudder pedals, check freedom of controls
8) Check parking brake on
9) Extinguisher to Engine 3
10) Primer to Engine 3 - use 3 or 4 strokes depending on the outside temps
11) Engine 3 switch to start, count to twelve and then flick MESH
12) Check pressure and temps gauges
13) Switch on generator for Engine 3
14) Repeat for Engines 4, 2 and 1

I think I may have missed a step there, I usually use the checklist on my clipboard to make sure I do things in the right order and don't miss anything.
I also found this video a while ago, which I thought was pretty awesome:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOl5YpFVGYU

EDIT: Ah, booster pumps, forgot those, wouldn't go very far without them. :haha:

[seaniam81]

Now...let's see if I can do this from memory...

1) Switch inverter to alternate flow and check voltage on each battery
2) Activate Hydraulics pump and get Hydraulics pressure up to spec
3) Magnetos on
4) Cowl flaps to 75%
5) Intercoolers to cold
6) Fuel to Rich
7) Unlock control column and rudder pedals, check freedom of controls
8) Check parking brake on
9) Extinguisher to Engine 3
10) Primer to Engine 3 - use 3 or 4 strokes depending on the outside temps
11) Engine 3 switch to start, count to twelve and then flick MESH
12) Check pressure and temps gauges
13) Switch on generator for Engine 3
14) Repeat for Engines 4, 2 and 1

I think I may have missed a step there, I usually use the checklist on my clipboard to make sure I do things in the right order and don't miss anything.
I also found this video a while ago, which I thought was pretty awesome:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOl5YpFVGYU

EDIT: Ah, booster pumps, forgot those, wouldn't go very far without them. :haha:
LOL was about to say you wont be able to start the engines. Booster pump 3 needs to be turned on for the primer system to work

[mapuc]

Forgot one thing from my story

Steve(it was his real name forgot all about it)

He emailed me a check-list, which I should print and have at hand to use in the game.

Markus

[Red October1984]

Now...let's see if I can do this from memory...

1) Switch inverter to alternate flow and check voltage on each battery
2) Activate Hydraulics pump and get Hydraulics pressure up to spec
3) Magnetos on
4) Cowl flaps to 75%
5) Intercoolers to cold
6) Fuel to Rich
7) Unlock control column and rudder pedals, check freedom of controls
8) Check parking brake on
9) Extinguisher to Engine 3
10) Primer to Engine 3 - use 3 or 4 strokes depending on the outside temps
11) Engine 3 switch to start, count to twelve and then flick MESH
12) Check pressure and temps gauges
13) Switch on generator for Engine 3
14) Repeat for Engines 4, 2 and 1

I think I may have missed a step there, I usually use the checklist on my clipboard to make sure I do things in the right order and don't miss anything.
I also found this video a while ago, which I thought was pretty awesome:

EDIT: Ah, booster pumps, forgot those, wouldn't go very far without them. :haha:

Spot on.

I start with engine 1 though. Does it make a difference?

I think I did 1, 3, 4, 2 last night. They all started up just fine. :yeah:


and yeah....you won't go far without the booster pumps....and don't accidently click the fuel cutoff switched directly behind them.

I did that without realizing it and I kept trying to start the engine... :dead:

[Sailor Steve]

My dad always said they started number 3 first. But my dad was a career airline pilot. It would appear that the main reason was that passengers boarded on the left, and in those days they didn't have jetways. Passengers walked across the tarmac and up a portable staircase.

So, to my surprise, the correct B-17 starting sequence is indeed 1-2-3-4.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChFGBgvVBtA

[Red October1984]

My dad always said they started number 3 first. But my dad was a career airline pilot. It would appear that the main reason was that passengers boarded on the left, and in those days they didn't have jetways. Passengers walked across the tarmac and up a portable staircase.

So, to my surprise, the correct B-17 starting sequence is indeed 1-2-3-4.

I started mine out of order because I had to figure out how to use the starter and mesh switches...

Left click for engine 1 and 3

Right click for engine 2 and 4 :)

[seaniam81]

My dad always said they started number 3 first. But my dad was a career airline pilot. It would appear that the main reason was that passengers boarded on the left, and in those days they didn't have jetways. Passengers walked across the tarmac and up a portable staircase.

So, to my surprise, the correct B-17 starting sequence is indeed 1-2-3-4.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChFGBgvVBtA

Yes the offical Boeing start sequence is 1,2,3,4 however this was modified by USAF (or USAAF) to 3,4,1,2 because in the B-17 two out of the three batteries were beside engine 3. So by starting 3 it makes it easier on the batteries with less travel for the current, less heat, and less resistance.

[Red October1984]

Yes the offical Boeing start sequence is 1,2,3,4 however this was modified by USAF (or USAAF) to 3,4,1,2 because in the B-17 two out of the three batteries were beside engine 3. So by starting 3 it makes it easier on the batteries with less travel for the current, less heat, and less resistance.

Makes perfect sense.

Also, the game has me set the cowl flaps to full 100% on start up. :hmmm:

EDIT: AHA! Oberon! We both forgot the Master Switch in between the Magneto switches.

[Oberon]

EDIT: AHA! Oberon! We both forgot the Master Switch in between the Magneto switches.

D'oh! Yes, that handle that you push up, funny old thing. It does help to start the thing up. :haha:

[Red October1984]

D'oh! Yes, that handle that you push up, funny old thing. It does help to start the thing up. :haha:

I was just practicing the engine start up and I was wondering...

Why won't these things start? :hmmm:

So I started over and shut off the magnetos and that's when I knew.... :03:

[Oberon]

I was just practicing the engine start up and I was wondering...

Why won't these things start? :hmmm:

So I started over and shut off the magnetos and that's when I knew.... :03:

Had a similar thing with a Spitfire Mk I on Cliffs of Dover earlier on, Magnetos were on, radiator shut (to warm her up quicker), why you no start?

Oh...wait...fuel cock...it helps... :dead:

[Red October1984]

Had a similar thing with a Spitfire Mk I on Cliffs of Dover earlier on, Magnetos were on, radiator shut (to warm her up quicker), why you no start?

Oh...wait...fuel cock...it helps... :dead:

Oh...I bet that sucks when you have to be off in a hurry.

Scramble the fighters! We're the last line of defense!

And then your fuel is shut off and you don't realize it. :har:

[Sailor Steve]

Yes the offical Boeing start sequence is 1,2,3,4 however this was modified by USAF (or USAAF) to 3,4,1,2 because in the B-17 two out of the three batteries were beside engine 3. So by starting 3 it makes it easier on the batteries with less travel for the current, less heat, and less resistance.
So why does the instructor in the official USAAF training film say "1-2-3-4"?

[Oberon]

I think it varies from pilot to pilot, the '43 training manual and video say 1,2,3,4, the revised '49 manual says 3,4,2,1. I take my sequence from the checklist provided with the aircraft, but I don't think it's too important which engine is started first. I prefer to start inboard rather than outboard first because it's closer to the cockpit for visibility, and since I'm usually in the co-pilot seat to mesh then number 3 is right next to me, so I can have the window open and see and hear her start up.

I found this thread:
http://forum.armyairforces.com/Starting-a-B17-on-engine-2-m233995.aspx

[Red October1984]

I think it varies from pilot to pilot, the '43 training manual and video say 1,2,3,4, the revised '49 manual says 3,4,2,1. I take my sequence from the checklist provided with the aircraft, but I don't think it's too important which engine is started first. I prefer to start inboard rather than outboard first because it's closer to the cockpit for visibility, and since I'm usually in the co-pilot seat to mesh then number 3 is right next to me, so I can have the window open and see and hear her start up.

I think it's just a matter of "Let's treat this thing right so we can make it last extra long."

I set everything for all the engines before energizing and meshing. They seem to start up and run fine. I just think it saves time to do it this way.

I know it's probably incorrect...but i'm still learning. :D

EDIT: Oberon...what wondorous website is that?! I found this Memoirs of 2Lt. Billy Runnels (http://www.303rdbg.com/runnels-memories.html) on that page....

[Sailor Steve]

Thanks Oberon. That helps quite a bit. I decided to check the planes my dad flew, just to be sure of my memory, and found yet another discussion with no definite conclusion.
http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-374803.html

[Red October1984]

I'm currently on my way to Germany! :rock:

If time machines existed and worked like the common theory.... This is what I would do with it. Go back and be a USAAF pilot. :sunny:


EDIT: After another Flak-CTD, I decided to get to the bottom of this. Turns out, all you have to do is set the compatibility setting to Windows 2000. I just came back from the Bremen single mission. Sadly, Liberty Belle and Memphis Belle along with 2 others did not make it. I made it...but 40 crewmen did not.

45 Purple Hearts were given out. The other 5 were men aboard one of the bombers at the edge of the formation that took a real beating from the 109's. Those men suffered light wounds.


----

I LOVE THIS GAME!