would also like to see some new things for the starship. the plane is still my absolute favorite BS plane. special place in my hangar. heart warming to see it and to get on board.

@hunterdouglas Just to try and close this off as best we can: Restart - Sounds like a conflict with GSXPro due to memory issues. The restart fixes it as it starts a new instance. Not sure there can be a permanent fix because both programs are competing for the same resource. Still don't undertsand the GA thing you are proposing. That would work for a single aircraft/airfield, but the issue we face is re-creating that on a global scale and, unlike commercial airlines flights, the taxiway and runway situation at many of the small fields in MSFS is not the same as it was for FSX/P3D. When we experimented with this we found countless issues of planes moving around aimlessly and coming to a halt, not taking off, not landing, landing off the field etc etc. A GA program (as we had in previous versions) that we could sell to the public would need to make a reasonable attempt to get the correct types and registrations of aircraft at the right places and this is not currently feasible to do in the same way that we achieved with FSX/P3D and X-Plane. Believe me, the revenue from a GA pack would be most welcome and it would also give us an excuse to use some of the models we updated in anticipation. However, as it stands, it may have to wait for the next version of Traffic and, either way, woudl always be an add-on, rather than part of the main FS Traffic program. Same for military flights - also much easier to achieve with a degree of realism in FSX. Blackpool - you are seeing nothing there from FS Traffic because there are no commercial airline flights for that airport in the database. There are things like Citations going in and out occasionally and King Airs from the likes of RVL, but the FS Traffic database is centred on scheduled commercial airline flights and therefore airports like Blackpool won't be catered for. We list all the aircraft and airlines featured (850+), but that is never going to cover every operator and every airfield and we try to make this as clear as possible. All the traffic programs we have released over the last 25-odd years have had to compromise on realism to some degree and the latest version is no exception. However, we do think (and customer feedback suggests) that the latest version of FS Traffic achieves its task of adding realistic commercial airline traffic to the MS2024 world.

@santos Sorry for delay in reply but the enquiry is a bit beyond the scope of the forum I think and no forum users seem to have replied. In brief: Yes No Don't think so but might be possible in a limited way Yes In more detail, yes you can import other aircraft to use with FS Traffic - caveat being there must be a schedule. No - you have to use the MSFS style flightplans. You can do this via the Traffic Control,Centre IIRC. More details in the manual which can be downloaded from the JF website. Not really possible. You can switch between databases AFAIK, but it starts getting complicated if you want to tinker about with a global schedule. Paint kits - yes, these are available.

Ahhhh, NOT the one I am using. Thanks!!!!

@Black-Square something like euro truck sim when drivers sleepy maybe? If not, then perhaps loss of controls to a greater degree?

Please let me know if that fixed the issue. Thanks

I made a Lua script for FSUIPC7 that sets the active frequency to a dummy frequency when COM CIRCUIT ON is off, and restores it to the previous frequency when COM CIRCUIT ON is on, for COM1 and COM2 separately. (Initially I tried using SI's start/stop ATC keybind, muting the whole SI app, changing COM volumes, and changing COM receive selection, but changing the frequency worked out the best.) Requires the payware version of FSUIPC7 to run. com1_power_offset = 0x66DE -- A:CIRCUIT COM ON:1 com2_power_offset = 0x66DF -- A:CIRCUIT COM ON:2 com_active_hz = {} com_active_hz[com1_power_offset] = 0x05C4 com_active_hz[com2_power_offset] = 0x05C8 RADIO_SET_HZ = {} RADIO_SET_HZ[com1_power_offset] = 67240 RADIO_SET_HZ[com2_power_offset] = 67242 stored_frequency = {} stored_frequency[com1_power_offset] = nil stored_frequency[com2_power_offset] = nil dummy_frequency = 111000000 function check(power_offset,power_status) if power_status == 0 then stored_frequency[power_offset] = ipc.readUD(com_active_hz[power_offset]) ipc.control(RADIO_SET_HZ[power_offset],dummy_frequency) else if stored_frequency[power_offset] then --script is meant to be run before radios are first turned on, but check just in case ipc.control(RADIO_SET_HZ[power_offset],stored_frequency[power_offset]) end end end event.offset(com1_power_offset,"UB","check") event.offset(com2_power_offset,"UB","check")

FYI - the ETM seemed similar to the one in the Turboprop Bonanza and Duke - and both of these work correctly in the Duke. That's why I thought it might be a TBM specific issue (or an update that didn't make it to the TBM yet).

Every post here shows me that the AP is not being used correctly for climbs, and probably descents too. It's not an A320 Airbus. Best explained in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho7B8AOt7Os. It will change how you approach the whole thing. BTW running at full power or any torque setting that results in prolonged red or even yellow torque numbers will destroy your engines very VERY quickly.

This is the same MSFS 2024 LOD ""feature"" that we've discussed many times for all my aircraft. I have a workaround, but it must be applied by hand to each object that I think might disappear. I will review this for all my aircraft before their next updates (should only take a few hours across the fleet), but there was also a recent offer from Asobo to "reopen the discussion internally", which might yield fruit. Thanks for letting me know.

@afowle23 I ses, Thanks for the info!

I see, thanks for the reply. Hopefully asobo will improve the lacking physics in the future. Thanks either way!

Guys neofly is pretty good already. Moreover, two good career addons are already in the pipeline with one being in early access - frontierwings (for dedicated bushflying) and another one cant remember the name, for underworld activities. Additionally, maybe sometime in the future BS can roll out their own career addon

Nick dont get me wrong. i dont blame you for being late on MS-store at all. i am used to a waiting time. that was not a complain. career: a reseller saying its to much works sounds reasonable looking at the cash that he might loose. i hope its not your only source for that topic i didnt say it means so much to me. i just told what happend at the end for me. i saw the caravan and thought great plane i want it. then i found myself waiting and not buying it and i thought why? and then i realized i bought planes and flew addon planes that work in career. i am 50 not a kid and i fire up msfs grab one of my fav. addon planes and do 1-2 flights a day and those flights i do in career mostly. as i said its one personal perspective. now to diffrent view: ms-store+scam-devs (mscenery, etc) = insane amount of money. why? so basically there are many people wasting much money on those crappy planes. so there is a huge potential and i think career mode is connected with this potential. those customers go straight into career. the past was flightsim is for serious simmers only. that is history. the insanity bringing it to consoles openend up a few hundred millions possible customers. in my IT-mind i thought: once you are familiar with the integration its easier to port it to all planes since you know how its done. but hey its Microsoft. most times they screw everything up and make it horrible. so dont get me wrong please i am not mad. just sad i cant fly the BS planes in career. maybe you are wrong with your user base theory. maybe i am right looking not back but forward. cheers oh and i hate to check multiple stores for updates, donwload install and all that stuff. i got lazy

Well that is a serious imersion breaker! Here's hoping JF fix this some time this century!