CWDT BF109G Vol.I finally released !!!

S

sophocles

Guest
Miguel from simmarket has dutifully informed us that the product is now available from the following site:

http://secure.simmarket.com/cwdt-mes...109-vol1.phtml

Cheers everyone, thanks for your patience!




We'd like to inform everyone as we have on the product description page and in the documentation that although the aircraft set was designed for Microsoft Flight Simulator 9 we have provided for a fully compatible
and functioning plane set for Microsoft Flight Simulator X; which although not native (meaning it does not exploit all of the DirectX 10 features of the latter), does not in our view detract from the graphic experience​


in-game (see the Paint Schemes and Instrument Panel sections in this manual for actual screenshots). I
t is however fully compatible with Service pack 1, Acceleration, and Service Pack 2.

Sophocles
<!-- / message -->
 
Sophocles, great to see CWDT back in action. Been waiting for this one and definitely added to my hanger. The FPS are comparable with most all native FSX aircraft. Thanks a million.
 
calypsos said:
Oh, does 'not fully native' really mean FR's of 12-15 instead of 28-30??
Click to expand...

It means the reverse in my admittedly limited experience. I find the new A2A WOP II Mustang significantly faster (and smoother, which is more important) in FSX than the old FS9 port.

(Edit) Talking cr*p here, my apologies - long day, eyes gone, brain following..
 
So this has the ussual prop clipping problems with non native planes? Almost looks like from the screenshots it does not, but non native to me means prop clipping.
 
What I can tell so far; My FR's drop into the teens when I'm flying this 109. When I switch to a native FSX planes, they jump back up into the 35-40 range (set at 45). The tail is VERY heavy during take off and in the air it seems sluggish for what I'd think a 109 should handle like; naturely I've never flown one so how could I know. The prop suffers the same non-native problem. The DB sounds are awesome and are the best part of the package for me! Externally it looks good. Internal........the VC is very lacking in detail it looks like an older FS9 pit. Mike C's VC is much better! Over all with just a few minutes in it..........I'm most likely going to remove it from FSX and stick with the FR 109's!
 
The prop clipping really isn't noticeable. It's a lovely model but I'm not getting great frame rates - averaging 15-24 over stock FSX scenery near Duxford, with the exterior views hitting the frame rate hardest. This is on a Quad Core Phenom, 9800GT, Vista and FSX SP2 installed a la Nick C (but possibly due for a tune-up). I lock at 30 and all my FSX native warbirds like the F6F and the A2A Mustang / Spitfire / 109 / P-40 run like silk. Big sigh - but she is a beauty.
 
Well, as I suspcted, it is really a port over. I decided not to use portovers when I got FSX running well, as they always seem to FR stutter on TO and landing.

I think after almost 3 years of FSX, we should be getting a native model for our money, however good it looks.

IMHO this is a superb looking model, but really for FS9 only.
 
calypsos said:
I decided not to use portovers when I got FSX running well, as they always seem to FR stutter on TO and landing..
Click to expand...

So did I, but with a desperate need for a mid-war 109 in FSX I thought it was worth the risk. Wrong, unfortunately - and 21 quid later I have finally learned my lesson.
 
I don't see why people are still doing ports. I mean A2A has shown it's not that hard to re-export a native model... Or is it? In the grand scheme with product life, etc, it must certainly make more sense to do so, becuase guys like me won't touch a ported product. At one point there was no choice, but today there's a whole arsenal of natives available, so why settle for less?
 
cirrus and stratos clouds seem not to interfere with the prop arc like cumulus do...thats why I only use cirrus during flights with my FS9 ports (the Christen Eagle is really the only one I still use) - you can lay them on relatively thick and still get a nice prop in the external view.

ALL port overs impact frame rates more than native FSX planes - there are no exceptions I've ever seen unless the plane has so few polys that its just butt ugly
 
Despite peoples thoughts, doesn't this new project not warrant a sticky with the other releases in respect to the developers?
 
I don't remember seeing that. I was just thinking it would be nice to sticky this out of respect for Phanis and the work that went into this plane, irrespective or personal feelings which have been aired.

I think that CWDT have been very open about the plane being a port, so I fail to see what the problem is. Don't we all feel that it's the clandestine ports that really nark us, where a product is advertised as being full FSX when it's not?

Anyhoo, not looking to start a fight, just trying to be fair. :engel016:
 
I agree Nick,
There was no attempt to hoodwink re FsX native but the unpleasantness in the Fs9 forum thread meant that it was unstickied and floated off into the ether....

I enjoyed Phanis' work in the past and their Fs9 Hellcat (which I beta'd)was very nicely textured. However although I have ported Fs9 aircraft over to FsX, I won't purchase a port to use exclusively in FsX.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top