Jump to content

Martyn Pearson

Members
  • Content Count

    41
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Good

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    I belong to both VATSIM & IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

1,241 profile views
  1. Great product and of all the years I have used the product across my two purchases (v1 and v2), it's the most useful and best value addon I own.
  2. The one thing missing now to make life easier with AI is the ability to specify the runway/s in use! Is that possible?
  3. Exactly this. It's not a binary decision to worship or seek destruction. OP think he knows the facts, but is getting confused about knowing his opinion. Just try and treat your fellow human being a little better, and if you have nothing good / 'factual' to say, maybe don't bother? I'm not pro Project Fly, I'm anti people like the OP who provide even less for the community other than maintaining its poor reputation.
  4. Project Fly often has more active users in a month than VATSIM or IVAO with associated costs. Why the ongoing need to pay bills comes as a surprise to some I'm not sure. People, like some in this thread just don't understand what an insignificant minority they are and want their own drama. The OP being a textbook example.
  5. It's not for vendors to decide on the opinions of potential customers / the community. Suck it up. The vocal (minority?) are not impressed with the proposition and then using a nav-database product that is against the grain of the one the many others pay for and use with countless other vendors takes the pricing into the realm of being comical. As a community we will chuck good money at bad products with far too little consideration. If this is the reaction this gets, what does that say?
  6. I have attempted this with many of the cloud gaming services like liquid sky. I found the compression made cockpit quality really poor and being limited to 1920 x 1080 a bit of a deal breaker. Do you have some screenshots of how it looks for you?
  7. You need to be in aircraft follow mode for the traffic to move in real-time. That means having this button ON.
  8. I have never created a PFPX profile before. But given the CJ2 is pretty simple, I don't think it would be a disaster to have one with limited available data. So I have created this one using the docs from Carenado and also some of the specs posted on this forum a long time ago. I am sure if anyone has more data it can be greatly improved. I am sure it contains some errors, as if I plan a flight with max payload, I get a warning. If I take a few kg/lbs off the ZFW this goes away. Some info I could not find but used values from the CJ1+ profile, such as equipment. I used, hold, 2 climb profiles, 1 cruise and 2 decent. This should be considered alpha, but I would appreciate anyone's input or time on testing a few flights vs expectations. DROPBOX DOWNLOAD
  9. Ignore me. I did a re-install and re-read every line in the readme, as it's a little strange on the wording. But after that, I was able to get NAV to engage.
  10. I'm getting exactly the same as this. With the mod installed in P3D v4 The Nav button will not light up and and nav source from the GPS does not work. (The GTN is working as expected in a mod for the Premier) So I'm not sure it is working in P3D v4.
  11. +1 I can confirm the above is happening here too.
  12. No, and I don't think you have understood my post at all. Justflight wanted to distribute the update for free, so you would suspect the charge is being put upon JustFlight by Milviz, as cash is flowing back to them. If the cash was only going to JustFlight, why would they be writing an email about wanting to make it free like they do their own products? You suspect they want to charge MilViz for issuing an update, but not the customer? I doubt it.
×
×
  • Create New...