• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

Beech 18

So what exactly is the difference between this and the SimTech Beech 18 that was freeware years ago? It looks exactly the same to me in screens, and it's clearly not a native FSX model.
 
Ken Stallings said:
Very interesting when I went to that website and saw the list of aircraft, immediately I thought of Sim Tech due entirely that the aircraft lineup matched that of Sim Tech and then I noticed that back in September of 2009, Sim Tech was bought out by this CR1 operation.

I'm sure there is an interesting story to that move.

Cheers,

Ken
Click to expand...

Ken, it's still operated by Crashwoody, no changes really other than that the old crewmembers are no longer aboard as I understand it.
Browse the archives for Tom's posts over the past couple of years and you'll get a picture.
Welcome back btw!:salute:
 
Unbelievable...FSX was released almost 4 years ago and some 'developers' are still selling FS9-portovers...:rolleyes:

Greetings
Tim
 
Tim-HH said:
Unbelievable...FSX was released almost 4 years ago and some 'developers' are still selling FS9-portovers...:rolleyes:

Greetings
Tim
Click to expand...

What is believeable is that 10's of thousands of simmers still fly and enjoy FS2004, FS2002, and FS98. I still develop for FS2004 and FS2002, and accommodate conversions to CFS2 and CFS3. There is still a large market for freeware and payware for these sims.

What is unbelieveable is that seasoned simmers would make a statement like this about a large swath of our community. Please keep comments in this and all threads pertinent to the topic.
 
Milton Shupe said:
What is believeable is that 10's of thousands of simmers still fly and enjoy FS2004, FS2002, and FS98. I still develop for FS2004 and FS2002, and accommodate conversions to CFS2 and CFS3. There is still a large market for freeware and payware for these sims.

What is unbelieveable is that seasoned simmers would make a statement like this about a large swath of our community. Please keep comments in this and all threads pertinent to the topic.
Click to expand...

Milton,

I never said a word against the FS2004 or FS2002 users! Therefore I really can't understand your accusation.

We are here in the FSX forum and this Beech 18 is not a true FSX aircraft only a portover. That's all :)

Greetings
Tim
 
Let's face it guys there are a number of excellent aircraft that convert well to FSX SP2 and FSX Accel with some minor modifications. I can't imagine a flight sim world without the A-26, the Grizzly, and a host of other great aircraft that simply are not available to us yet in FSX. I personally don't mind $7.50 for this particular port-over. It does however make you appreciate the high quality freeware port-overs even more. I don't fly much in fs9 so I'm glad to have them in the FSX world with the FTX and FSAddon scenery I love to fly in.
Ted
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
Tim,

Your comment was targeted to 'Developers' (who are diminished by your quotes) because they still provide for other than native FSX. The fact is many FSX users port-over even when we say "FS2004 Only". Developers who are kind enough to try to accommodate those who port-over should not be chided for doing so.
 
Milton Shupe said:
Tim,

Your comment was targeted to 'Developers' (who are diminished by your quotes) because they still provide for other than native FSX. The fact is many FSX users port-over even when we say "FS2004 Only". Developers who are kind enough to try to accommodate those who port-over should not be chided for doing so.
Click to expand...

I happen to dissagree there.
The aircraft in question costs money (even if not much) and appears to be advertized as FS9/FSX.
It appears, judging by user commends, that it's not FSX native and not even the installer seems to do it's job.
Had been grand if the developer had stated something more as to the whatabouts rather than implying "FSX" while it is clearly not.
Apparently the label "FSX" on this plane is at least somewhat missleading.
 
I don't share your view, Milton! At least not for payware. However, it was not my intention to hijack this thread so we should stop this discussion.

Greetings
Tim
 
As to the cold/dark engine start... Some of the versions of FSX use slightly different sim parameters and bvehaviors vary. If the engines do not start, increase the starter torque in the .cfg file from 1.3 to 1.7.

Accel seems to need a bit more torque than SP2.

T
 
That did it - Many thanks. Glenn


fliger747 said:
As to the cold/dark engine start... Some of the versions of FSX use slightly different sim parameters and bvehaviors vary. If the engines do not start, increase the starter torque in the .cfg file from 1.3 to 1.7.

Accel seems to need a bit more torque than SP2.

T
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top