I like the cloud improvements & have noticed that aircraft tend to be more buffeted by weather, especially on approach. However, the perennial prob with flight sims is that there really is no overall goal - you take off, fly around & land again. Often it's pretty dull. Check out www.flightsim.com for decent add ons.

Oh and one more thing, since when did the Americans take over global atc??? or is that naive of me?!

Whatever the reason, tis also a shame they do not use Airbus. Getting a bit bored of Boeing :rolleyes:

Flight sim a/c download
 

hi
does anyone know of a website i can download the PA-28-151 aircraft for flight sim 2000?

Cheers
Dave

Try

Flightsim.com

They have most aircraft for most flight sims. Need to register, but it is a great resource for flightsim goodies. Everything from scenery to instrument panels

T'Bug :ok:

PC requirements for MS Flight Sim
 

Hi, Anyone let me know if I can use MS Flight sim on an older pc. I have a AMD K6 or K2/ 450mhz with 320 mb RAM, and can put it up to 512 mb RAM if need to. Do you think that is enough to handle the MS Flight Sim or would it be too slow and jumpy.
Cheers

Java,

The amount of RAM you need all depends on which OS you are running. If you are running WinXP for example then 512Mb is appropriate, if you are running Win98 then something around 128Mb is fine.

Running K6 II 450mhz is the lowest end for running and is not going to run Flight Sim very well at all, even with all the minimum settings within the Sim.

Take Care,

Richard

It will also depend on what version of flight sim you want to use. FS2004 is very heavy to use by all accounts and you will get a very low frame rate. Although I ran CFS 2 on a similiar machine, to yours, albeit with a good video card and it was playable.

For your machine I would recommend X-plane it is not as hungry as FS2004 (mostly due to the scenery not being as detailed) and many think it's flight characteristics are more "realistic".

I ran MS Flight Sim 2000 on a PII 350, and had to turn down many of the settings to get it to perform decently. X-Plane is definitely easier on your hardware, and isn't that far behind in scenery detail. If you do want all of the scenery details though you will need a faster computer, but if you're just looking for something to practice procedures, turning down graphics setting s will work fine. X-Plane at the time ran pretty well, but I haven't tried a more recent version of the sim that computer. Most flight sims benefit more from faster processors and RAM than video cards, so if you can you should look at upgrading the processor.

goates

You may find that FS2002 runs better than FS2000. I think they did a bit of code optimisation. I did run both FS2000 & 2002 on a 450Mhz Pentium III PC, and it wasn't too bad. I soon found that I wanted to upgrade, however...

Ah a subject I know a bit about ;)
Sad as it is and I know I should get out more!!!
Ok I have had various versions of MS flight sims and with the spec you have I would suggest FS98 it has bags of features works very well, will accept a decent 3D graphics card ( worth having to get all the nice eye candy to work). On a set up like yours it should run pretty well, plus there are loads and loads of add-ons for Flightsim98 at free web sites like www.avsim.com and www.flightsim.com just search for FS98 in the file library.
If your need any further advice whack me an e-mail
[email protected]
hope that helps.
As an extra FS98 can be had for as little as £1 on Ebay!!! never need to pay more than £10 for it anywhere.... the later versions of FS will cripple your computer and will look like a slide show...

Thanks volrider, appreciate your time and info.

Microsoft Flight Simulator??
 

Hi,

I'm thinking about getting Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 "A Century Of Flight" edition. As anyone of you used it yet? How is it?? what about the 2002 one?

cheers

This was discussed a little bit before - I'm still trying to get to grasp with 2002 when I have a minute - but I have heard that 2004 is power-hungry.

amofw

FS2004 is no more power hungry than 2k2, however it has better clouds and ATC so just remember to turn the clouds down a bit in the options and keep the traffic below 55% and it should run no different to 2k2 but with a better visual appeal.
hope that helps

F.S.
I'm not sure what the actual shop is like, but I've purchased online stuff from Transair pilot shop in London.
They might be worth trying

http://www.transair.co.uk/londonshop.asp

419

Flight Simulator Widows Group
 

Hi,

If your Girlfriend/Wife/Fiancee/Mistress/Lover is always complaining about your Flight Simulator Use then they should go here

http://webtek.clansites.co.uk/fswforum/index.php

Flight Simulator Widows Group Forum, Newly Opened

Garmin Pilot III & Microsoft Flight Simulator
 

How do you link the two together so your position and route in MFS is output onto the Garmin. I know you need a utility called GPSOUT, but I can't get it to work.

I know there are a few threads out there on this, but there doesn't seem to be a definitive answer.

Any help - much appreciated.

Let me get this right - you are actually proposing to use a toy (sophisticated toy, but toy, nonetheless) to prepare a route to go into a purpose-built navigational instrument. Why?????

I hope you are not intending to use this as primary nav aid!!!

That isn't right. What KCDW wants to do, I believe, is have the current position of the plane (in the simulator) output to the GPS. It's not as daft as it sounds. It lets you experiment with using the GPS during a "real-world" flight. And if you're just playing with the sim then it lets you play more realistically, if such is your want.

Phew. Drauk's interpretation is the correct one! I've just got it, and want to play with on land.

For those who understand these things, my settings for the Garmin are:

attached to COM2
Simulator mode
Aviation In Protocol

The GPSOut ini file is:

Sentences=RMC,GGA,GSA,GSV,RMA,PGRMZ,AV400
Interval=1000
Port=COM2
M (don't know what that's for)
Speed=4800

Thanks