MS FS2020
Moderator: FSAirlines Staff
- joefremont
- FSAirlines Developer
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:46 am
- Location: KSFO
Re: MS FS2020
I have the Alpha/Closed Beta and am already flying in it, you need the beta client of course. I have already put in my pre-order, but demand will may clog up things up but I fully expect that by the following weekend I will have tested the new client with FS2020 and will have the stable version of 2.4 out.
I've sworn an oath of solitude until the pestilence is purged from the lands.
Re: MS FS2020
The 2.3.3 client works as well, you can fuel FS2020 aircraft from the client.
If you overload your aircraft and remove cargo from the client it will mess up the c of g and makes the A320N unfliable.
If you overload your aircraft and remove cargo from the client it will mess up the c of g and makes the A320N unfliable.
-
- Ticket Agent
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 11:55 am
Re: MS FS2020
Did two flights with the C208 and the 2.4-rc4 client including removing of cargo due to mtow and no problems.
Cheers
T.
Cheers
T.
AMV119 Thorsten Ruerup - COO - Andras Meridian Airlines
Re: MS FS2020
Try the Airbus, if you don't mind. CheersThorsten42 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:15 amDid two flights with the C208 and the 2.4-rc4 client including removing of cargo due to mtow and no problems.
Cheers
T.
Re: MS FS2020
Would be cool if all FSAirline pilots who are flying on FS2020 allowed me to add there ID to my friends list.
BVG951 is mine.
BVG951 is mine.
-
- Ticket Agent
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 11:55 am
Re: MS FS2020
Actually I tried the airbus but to be honest even in the release version I don't know if I want to do a complete flight with it. As good as the small birds seem to be... the tubeliners - even if we talk here about a good looking and somehow working default version - don't appeal that much to me. Perhaps we all are infected by evil pmdg/fslabs/as/etc viruses
What actually bothers me - and posted in the other msfs thread too - I get stutters in sim when the fsa client is running atm...
Cheers
T.
AMV119 Thorsten Ruerup - COO - Andras Meridian Airlines
- ApovanGulb
- Ticket Agent
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:14 pm
- Location: Germany
Re: MS FS2020
With the latest patches, the framerate has become much better while the client is running. I am playing with a friend and we both had no problems with the client so far - MSFS2020 bugs aside. The only issue I had was a "wrong destination" penalty after taxiing to a general aviation parking. Since then, we both hit the parking brakes right after exiting the runway and we had no more problems in this regard. Overspeeding & hard landing penalties seem to work, penalties for leaving your landing lights off/on don't. Which I don't mind, to be honest.
Our fleet consists of 2xBeechcraft 350, 2xCessna 208, 1xDA62 and 1xCessna 172 - all of which worked fine with the client, refueling and throwing out booked passengers from the client worked well. The 350 turned out to be a very comfortable and profitable plane to fly with FSA although the restricted vision does hamper the beauty of MSFS2020 somewhat. If you want more scenery, take the 208 but watch your fuel gauge.
With the latest patch I got some general bugs though. Avionic tend to crash now and then (with all cockpit lights turned off and/or fully dimmed) in the 350. And I thought about buying a Citation CJ4 for our VA but I get random CTDs if I fly that thing close to any major airport (had this problem with no other plane so far). The FMS and even the display options for that plane are still very limited so I guess it's not really worth trying it further at this point.
Our fleet consists of 2xBeechcraft 350, 2xCessna 208, 1xDA62 and 1xCessna 172 - all of which worked fine with the client, refueling and throwing out booked passengers from the client worked well. The 350 turned out to be a very comfortable and profitable plane to fly with FSA although the restricted vision does hamper the beauty of MSFS2020 somewhat. If you want more scenery, take the 208 but watch your fuel gauge.
With the latest patch I got some general bugs though. Avionic tend to crash now and then (with all cockpit lights turned off and/or fully dimmed) in the 350. And I thought about buying a Citation CJ4 for our VA but I get random CTDs if I fly that thing close to any major airport (had this problem with no other plane so far). The FMS and even the display options for that plane are still very limited so I guess it's not really worth trying it further at this point.
- joefremont
- FSAirlines Developer
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:46 am
- Location: KSFO
Re: MS FS2020
Sounds like your having a good experience. Btw the Landing light penalty was removed some time ago.ApovanGulb wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:38 pmWith the latest patches, the framerate has become much better while the client is running. I am playing with a friend and we both had no problems with the client so far - MSFS2020 bugs aside. The only issue I had was a "wrong destination" penalty after taxiing to a general aviation parking. Since then, we both hit the parking brakes right after exiting the runway and we had no more problems in this regard. Overspeeding & hard landing penalties seem to work, penalties for leaving your landing lights off/on don't. Which I don't mind, to be honest.
Our fleet consists of 2xBeechcraft 350, 2xCessna 208, 1xDA62 and 1xCessna 172 - all of which worked fine with the client, refueling and throwing out booked passengers from the client worked well. The 350 turned out to be a very comfortable and profitable plane to fly with FSA although the restricted vision does hamper the beauty of MSFS2020 somewhat. If you want more scenery, take the 208 but watch your fuel gauge.
With the latest patch I got some general bugs though. Avionic tend to crash now and then (with all cockpit lights turned off and/or fully dimmed) in the 350. And I thought about buying a Citation CJ4 for our VA but I get random CTDs if I fly that thing close to any major airport (had this problem with no other plane so far). The FMS and even the display options for that plane are still very limited so I guess it's not really worth trying it further at this point.
MSFS has redone the airport database and I have not yet been able to extract the data I need to update our airport database so there may be wrong airport penalties where our code and the new MSFS code do not match.
I've sworn an oath of solitude until the pestilence is purged from the lands.
Re: MS FS2020
I am happy to join your MSFS 2020 friends list. (I tried to respond to your suggestion weeks ago but can't have sent reply). Have you had any success in FSA tracking with default Cessna 208B? I cannot take onboard sufficient fuel to fly 344 nms between CYQT and CYEM. FSA suggests I need 860 lbs + 33 lbs onboard. Even with no packages, I get overweight msge. This continues even shedding fuel down to below 190, .lbs a totally unrealistic number.
Regards
Alastair
- joefremont
- FSAirlines Developer
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:46 am
- Location: KSFO
Re: MS FS2020
One of my first MSFS adventures was an around the world trip using the C208, I generally had to fly with only half payload otherwise you would not get the maximum range you needed over the longer distances.fackprod wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:22 amI am happy to join your MSFS 2020 friends list. (I tried to respond to your suggestion weeks ago but can't have sent reply). Have you had any success in FSA tracking with default Cessna 208B? I cannot take onboard sufficient fuel to fly 344 nms between CYQT and CYEM. FSA suggests I need 860 lbs + 33 lbs onboard. Even with no packages, I get overweight msge. This continues even shedding fuel down to below 190, .lbs a totally unrealistic number.
Regards
Alastair
I've sworn an oath of solitude until the pestilence is purged from the lands.
Re: MS FS2020
Real aircraft manufacturers are notorious for "padding the numbers". A lot of time their speeds will be listed in mph instead of knots and they will always use true airspeed instead of indicated and most performance numbers are based on 10,000 feet. So when they say it will cruise at 185 KTAS, yes that is at standard pressure/altitude at 10,000 feet with no wind. It does not mean it's what is showing on the airspeed gauge! With 0 wind, KTAS should be approximately equal to the ground speed. Also note that is the "maximum" cruise speed" which will dimish the range by a lot as you are sucking fuel much faster than "economy cruise speeds" (which are generally about 20 knots slower).
So here's the deal with the real 208: you can fly a long distance or carry a lot of stuff but you cannot do both at the same time. So as your flight times increase you will find yourself trading payload for fuel. It's just a fact of life. "useful load" numbers INCLUDE useable fuel! NOTE in the specs posted the "full fuel payload" number: 1286 lbs, a far cry from the max payload of 3190 lbs listed just above in the chart.
And yes, believe it or not the max landing weight for a 208 leaves you with very little fuel IF you are fully loaded to max zero fuel weight.
Most real world 208's like FedEx regional carriers fly "fully loaded" but by volume (cubic space), not MZFW.
taken directly from the Textron website:
https://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/g ... odel-specs
So here's the deal with the real 208: you can fly a long distance or carry a lot of stuff but you cannot do both at the same time. So as your flight times increase you will find yourself trading payload for fuel. It's just a fact of life. "useful load" numbers INCLUDE useable fuel! NOTE in the specs posted the "full fuel payload" number: 1286 lbs, a far cry from the max payload of 3190 lbs listed just above in the chart.
And yes, believe it or not the max landing weight for a 208 leaves you with very little fuel IF you are fully loaded to max zero fuel weight.
Most real world 208's like FedEx regional carriers fly "fully loaded" but by volume (cubic space), not MZFW.
taken directly from the Textron website:
https://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/g ... odel-specs