Jump to content

Brendan Ratchford

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I need to ferry an aircraft from LFPO to EDTF... EDTF unfortunately has no instrument approaches- so I would begin the flight IFR until a point, and then include VFR in the routing after a point- typically known in ICAO as a Y flight plan. How would I file this on VATSIM? Just tell the controller that I need a descent and request cancellation at that point?
  2. I would like to second the suggestion that the tracks that are concocted by the morning planning meeting be posted almost like the official daily track message. I was switched tracks and couldn’t find what NAT X was defined as. All worked out in the end, was able to confirm with gander on receipt of clearance.
  3. Ha! I guess it’s not the biggest fish to fry. I did notice the difference in interference when I was on the simulated HF compared to VHF transmissions. It was very good! I don’t monkey with the USB/off switches in the aircraft HF tuner, and the “HF SENS” knob is usually turned fully on. If you really want to get into the nitty gritty (isn’t that what we were , upon tuning to a new HF frequency when you key the mic you’ll hear a loud tone as the receiver tunes to the new frequency. Here’s a pic of the FMS ATC Page from my flight today. I utilize Hoppie’s acars in p3d, but the adoption
  4. Amazing! You guys definitely brought it to the next level this year. *CPDLC messages do have a preformatted "script" when dealing with clearances- but there is also a free text option to send. If you need any pictures I can snap a few at work tomorrow. Within the clearance dialog there's also a prompt to enter "remarks" such as "able higher after 30W" or something like that.
  5. I noticed crossing the pond today (really awesome job to all the controllers, had quite a quick departure out of BOS!)- the HF was very accurate sound-wise while someone was transmitting. However, the "problem" of HF is the constant interference one gets when tuned to the frequency and listening. These pops, statics, pings (as well as everyone else talking) is why the advent of CPDLC and SELCAL is so wonderful. For HF frequencies, would it be possible to inject that background static sound constantly- not just when someone is transmitting? Also- the CPDLC position reports worked very w
  6. No - rather, using the simobjects.cfg method to add FLAI only adds the aircraft partially (misses textures and effects, that are listed in the add-on xml file that FLAI installs). This causes clouds to flash due to "incompatible AI" - when I remove FLAI from the current scenario (by stopping Vpilot) the cloud flashing goes away. Of course FLAI is compatible- I've never seen this before since in 4.3 FLAI was able to be recognized by vpilot without adding it to the sim manually. But the simobjects method only adds part of the model, which is why I recommend waiting for a fix instead of using tha
  7. Looks like the addons.cfg method causes visual artifacts (cloud flashing), since the entire addon is not loaded into the sim.
  8. What's interesting is even when I check the "run as administrator" box on the setup.exe- windows still gives me the message that it protected my PC, and I have to go to "run anyway" - I wonder if windows is blocking the install at some point? I know this can be quite a rabbit hole, when the problem may be just something with Vpilot.
  9. Evan do you think its a permissions issue with FLAI writing to the simobjects file itself? Maybe right click install as admin on the initial FLAI setup file would work?
  10. After adding the above entry to the simobjects.cfg and editing the location, vpilot asked on next load to rescan the new simobjects. Looks like 90% match rate now.
  11. I can confirm this error as well.. will try the fix posted above. Fresh install of P3Dv4.4 and vpilot/flai on a fresh windows 10 install.
  12. Is it possible to transmit on COM 2 instead of COM 1 (perhaps simulating transmitting to ops, clearance for a reroute while still monitoring ground, etc)
  13. This is a great idea, especially for those users that are unable text!
  14. Well that answers my question. Really too bad they have this view.
×
×
  • Create New...