[jhb_airlines] Re: FSX and all that

  • From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 10:17:31 -0000

Not knowing anything about FSC I thought I'd take a look. FSC77 duly
downloaded and installed and being a demo version I was pleased that I had
30 minutes to play with it before it closed down.

First impression was that the default screen colours were absolutely awful
but I quickly got those under control. In fact it is possible to set it up
almost identical to the PCI radar display and that is what I have done.
Information on screen is good and it is easy to move around the map - I just
wish zoom was enabled for the mouse wheel.

A nice touch is that airway and control zone data includes upper and lower
levels so it is easy for IFR aircraft to see if they are still inside an
airway - and for VFR aircraft to remain clear underneath. Intersections are
a strange mix with some being enabled with the Int button and some with the
Fix button. The latter are mostly fixes for terminal approach procedures and
holds but it is still an odd division. I guess they added this because the
DAFIF data contains a huge amount of crap in this respect - a quick look
showing hundreds of SAM03, TNT70, CTM25 fixes and such like. These
alphanumeric fixes are pure fiction and really clutter up the screen but,
sadly, they turn up in a lot of software.

The airspace drawing is reasonably good although the display has the same
hiccups that the FPI radar display used to have. Arcs sometimes go the wrong
way or are badly drawn. Turn off CTRZ and turn on AIR1 and you will see what
I mean. It isn't overly annoying but it is definitely weird - and sadly out
of date. The PCI radar is more up to date than FSC. I presume the latest
copy with the Navigraph data may be better as the demo is still using the
last DAFIF set released.

Having got used to just dragging points from the map onto the flight plan
window in FSNav I found the FSC a bit more difficult to use. It's a pity you
have to select both the departure and destination airfields first and only
then can you work on the route but it doesn't take long to get used to this
as the default FS planner works the same way. A plus point is that, like
FSNav, you can define any point on the screen and not forced to stick to
just navaids or fixes.

The weak point of the software are the auto route options as they produce
very random routings. FSC has gone back to the early system of looking for
the nearest point in a 35 degree arc and then choosing that - something I
haven't seen since Winplanner for FS5. None of the three options seem to
look for an airway between two points which is sad as the information is
clearly available. On a flight from EGNS to EGCC none of the three options
gave anything like the correct route - KELLY L10 WAL MIRSI and preferred to
route the long way round via VANIN or POL VOR (eh?) or REMSI - DESIG. I'd
dump this bit as it is useless and suggest you use Routefinder to produce
correct routes and type this into FSC.

I'm not going to suggest FSC is bad because of the above because accurate
real world route planning these days is complex and it is very hard to get
right. FS flight planners are not up to this and should not be thought of as
auto planners - just an electronic map that you interact with. In this
respect FSC is good and I'd like to explore it more to see its full
potential.

That it works as a stand alone is excellent and really useful. There are
many times I want to check airspace, airports or airways - maybe prior to a
PCI event or curiosity from something posted on a forum. FSNav is good for
this but it is a pain loading up FS first just to look at the map. Instead I
find it easier to load my real planning software (PocketFMS) and look at
that. FSC gives me an alternative and ideal if wanting to check actual FS
data which could be very different from real world information.

bones

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Lucas
Sent: 05 December 2006 23:00
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FSX and all that


Tom

FSCommander is very similar to FSNav in many, indeed most, respects.
The one key difference is that it runs outside FS9 itself, not as a
module within FS9.  This means that, if you have a LAN, you can offload
FSCommander on to the other PC.  From my little experience of FSC, it
seems to deal with AI aircraft and other multiplayer aircraft better
than FSNav, and has one or two little refinements that I don't think
FSNav has (or at least I haven't found them in FSNav).

I can e-mail you the FSC manual off-list if you're interested.

Mike L

Tom Smith wrote:
> how are you finding the go flight gear.what about fsuipc is it needed
> .Paul if you are about is fscommander any thing like fs nav



Other related posts: