Skip to content

Black Square Add-Ons

2.9k Topics 17.3k Posts

Subcategories


  • 220 Topics
    2k Posts
    R
    @jmarkows It is not that bad, especially with the new ships/tech. I did start playing again recently. But in general I agree the planetary surface looked better before Odyssey.
  • 225 Topics
    1k Posts
    D
    Hi, Does anyone know if there are any good start up tutorials on Youtube with correct procedures? Cheers
  • 212 Topics
    977 Posts
    Senor55S
    Thanks, this answer a lot of questions for me.
  • 555 4k
    555 Topics
    4k Posts
    A
    @MarkS said in Bug? Fuel Burn.: This excerpt from the Starship Pilot's Operating Manual, page 3-22, seems to indicate that the gravity transfer is always active, unless of course the aft tank is full, in which case transfer would occur once fuel started being drawn from the aft tank. [image: 568d5af2-8628-4dda-9732-1a9db7d4ec6e.png] This is somewhat similar to the fueling on the Learjet 35A, where you only refuel into the tip tanks, and the tip tanks gravity feed into the wing tanks if room exists in those tanks. Link to the POH on Bob Scherer's Starship Resources site: Starship Pilot's Operating Manual From what I've gathered from the manual, the aircraft's fuel system consists of four tanks: a main tank set (divided into forward and aft compartments) and one auxiliary tank in each wing. On the ground, refueling must prioritize the main tanks over the auxiliary ones, observing an alternating pattern between the wings in increments of no more than 100 gallons to maintain aircraft balance. Although fuel flows by gravity from the forward to the aft compartment within the main system during refueling, there is no gravity transfer between the auxiliary and main tanks. In flight, this transfer relies exclusively on jet pumps operated by engine motive flow, which renders the fuel in the auxiliary tanks unusable should the pump system fail. Each system has independent filler ports, requiring the main and auxiliary tank caps to be handled separately.
  • 558 Topics
    3k Posts
    M
    Your welcome. I did let him know you were interested in talking to him - that he could contact you through here or the support staff. I did try to pass a message on to you through a support ticket (95631) about a month ago - so there's a chance not all of those messages are getting through (although I know it's been a BUSY month for you).
  • 47 276
    47 Topics
    276 Posts
    M
    @Black-Square Sorry about that one - for some reason I thought real taxiways changed the pavement markers too. Here's another one today: CYHZ Runway 32/14 - all of the signs say 23-05. Runway 23-05 is correctly marked. Let me know if you want me to continue to tag you on these - or just post and let you get to them when you can.
  • 461 Topics
    2k Posts
    bernd_lindner_1979B
    Thanks for the great offer, but it's a little too far away... I'm from Bavaria/Germany. And my wife is terrified of spiders So maybe in the next life - but who knows....
  • 429 2k
    429 Topics
    2k Posts
    E
    Great to know. Thanks! Love this aircraft!
  • BlackSquare KingAir Professional for MSFS2024

    23
    1 Votes
    23 Posts
    4k Views
    SwordS
    Take my money! The BSQ King Air Professional would be a 100% safe purchase for me
  • Twin Otter?...

    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    442 Views
    J
    I totally support this idea. I've been wishing for a realistic Twin Otter for ages. The Aerosoft version for MSFS2020 was aesthetically awesome. But the systems, flight dynamics, and turboprop simulation left a good bunch to be desired. The default one isn't even worth our time mentioning. I am very impresed with the Blacksquare Caravan and I know they would make an amazing Twin Otter.
  • Black Square Jetstream or B1900 request

    15
    2 Votes
    15 Posts
    862 Views
    H
    @Buzz thanks for posting that, the Command 114, 685 and 690B look interesting, especially the 690B. Hoping the King Air is next to release.
  • Velocity XL

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    46 Views
    Black SquareB
    @SchnauzerMan Hello, I am here, always working on my airplanes I don't really know. Just not enough posts to warrant it, I guess. Just Flight manages the forums. I just develop the aircraft. Have you updated your TDS installation lately? Those all sound like issues inherent to the Working Title G3X and TDS GTNxi interconnectivity, not the aircraft specifically. I haven't heard any other reports like this, despite the aircraft being update about a year ago with these new features, and being tested by the TDS developer himself, so hopefully it's just an outdated installation. It would also be helpful to know if you're using MSFS 2020 or 2024, in case we need to provide more information for him to investigate.
  • Black Square Custom Failure Notes

    12
    0 Votes
    12 Posts
    297 Views
    Black SquareB
    @ksmith Wonderful! Thanks for the feedback. Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you guys!
  • Updated Installers

    feedback
    6
    1 Votes
    6 Posts
    297 Views
    M
    @Rich Hi Rich! I think I have noticed a bug with new installers you're using for the Caravan Pro. On initial install, you can select a custom directory, which I did for v1.0. However, after downloading the updated v1.1 installer from the website just now, here is what happened. Normally, the installers can handle updates themselves without having to uninstall the old version. However, this time, even though it said in the installers UI that is was updating from v1 to v1.1 - it did not respect my original custom directory. It deleted the old v1.0 files, and then installed the new v1.1 into the MSFS 2024 community folder like the legacy installers would. Could it be rectified so that when updating an existing addon with InstallShield, it respects your custom install directory of the existing installed addon? Thank you
  • 0 Votes
    8 Posts
    262 Views
    B
    @Black-Square Sounds good.
  • Comm Power Circuits in Black Square Products

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    139 Views
    J
    @Black-Square Hi Nick, hopefully things with the Caravan have settled down enough for you to give your thoughts on some of this.
  • Immersion killed due to bad ice effect on static prop cones

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    185 Views
    P
    @Buzz It’s not about staring at the plane from the outside, it’s about visual consistency. Since the spinners are part of the pilot's field of view, a static ice effect on a rotating part looks like a glaring oversight. Black Square is known for 'study-level' systems, so the visuals should match that level of detail. As I mentioned, Just Flight has already proven it’s possible to do it right.
  • Signal Degradation Library, Mod, or Add-On

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    67 Views
    No one has replied
  • Dynamic registration broken?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    88 Views
    Black SquareB
    Sorry to hear that. To the best of my knowledge, I haven't done anything different in the configuration files between any of my aircraft in this respect. I know this feature has been inconsistent in MSFS 2024 since release, however. Perhaps someone else will chime in with some advice. You could also try Just Flight Support. Since they deal with a lot more aircraft than just my own, they might have seen this before.
  • How to enable failures

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    133 Views
    E
    @Black-Square Thanks so much for the quick response! That's super helpful, and exactly what I was hoping to get. Thanks again!
  • The eternal dilemma; to fly or not to fly?

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    220 Views
    J
    I'll fly in any weather, as long as I don't deliberately take off in it and instead let it surprise me at my destination.
  • Turbulence Sounds

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    75 Views
    No one has replied
  • Tutorial missions for Black Square aircrafts

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    370 Views
    B
    ^^ Take him up on it.
  • Request - G1000NXI Option For Future Black Square Aircraft In Development

    34
    6 Votes
    34 Posts
    7k Views
    C
    @Outermarker Oh that's really cool! I have a wishlist thread on the main msfs forums asking for a native G500/600 architecture. The G1000 is cool and all, but it's limited to just a handful of airframes - can't just drop it into any plane and be realistic. Same with the G3X - it is certified for the Bo, but wouldn't work for the Baron because it's not multi-engine compatible. That's why the G500/600 would be perfect. You could drop it into just about anything and connect it to a GNS or GTN, and still have a lot of the familiar Garmin functionality of the G1000/G3X.
  • A proposal for Breaker Checking

    2
    4 Votes
    2 Posts
    142 Views
    K
    As long as it's an option - and not forced upon the user -, it's fine. I personally don't want anything turning red, blue, etc.
  • Black Square Tablet Features

    15
    1 Votes
    15 Posts
    1k Views
    hangar_101H
    @SadBucket you don’t necessarily need to rummage between different pages. Sky4Sim has already implemented a plugin that integrates its tablet into the MSFS tablet - for instance. If you want to use only Sky4Sim’s features, you can: just select the Sky4Sim icon and the S4S interface will appear and can navigate only the features provided by S4S — the only difference is that it shows up inside the MSFS tablet. It definitely improves immersion, especially in aircraft that already have the “3D MSFS tablet” available.
  • Avidyne IFD 550/540 in Black Square addons

    4
    5 Votes
    4 Posts
    366 Views
    H
    Would love to see the Avidynes added as an option too!
  • 1 Votes
    1 Posts
    272 Views
    No one has replied