Simviation Forums

I just downloaded the boing 707 from the download section with it

Just had exactly the same problem.  My suggestion is, go into Windows Explorer and delete the thing!

You have to delete the aeroplane from the 'Aircraft' folder and all the '707' gauges from the 'gauges' folder.

The game works all right again after you've done that.

If you are really brave, you might try transferring it by hand from your 'unzipped' folder, instead of unzipping it in as the 'read.me' says.  But, much as I'd love to have a 707 in the stable, I'm not going to risk it myself!  

yeah, i just deleted it...

damn, i love that plane and i

I am absolutely amazed that anyone can issue such an extensive package without properly testing it.

The mind boggles

The Historic Jetliners Group has lots of various FS9 compatible 707's.

http://81.208.92.5/index.htm

Thanks a million, JRoc - what a good site, filling my boots!

This guy makes good reliable models of the early airliners, too........

http://www.dmflightsim.co.uk/

wow....now i have to stay awake the whole night flying those great aircrafts! Thanx alot, JRoc!!!!

oh yeah, and also thanx to Nav, great site you found there!

Unfortunately the HJG ones aren't compatible with FS9 - the engine fans are transparent. That's why I was so pleased to see this new package. Up to now there's only one 707 for FS9 that I know of and that's Lou Volland's 707-320.

I know I'm being niggly, but I don't like the engine shape on that one.

Gentlemen! Do not despair!





****** IMPORTANT - LOOK LOWER DOWN POST ******

I took the cfg and air files from a Gary Carlson B707-320 BOAC Air Cargo which I think was HJG, adjusted the contact points and this is what I got.

It took off and flew OK as well.

Comments

- visual model looks OK - shape etc
- textures rather poor - need to be demipped for a start
- wheels not at all round so don't look too closely
- panel - there are some better ones around.

All in all, good effort (I've never made a model so who am I to criticise?) but needs a lot of TLC before I would add it to my hangar I think.

****** READ HERE [glb]IMPORTANT[/glb]

The problem is only to do with the gauges. DO NOT COPY THE GAUGES IN THE ZIP INTO YOUR MAIN FS9 GAUGES FOLDER if you want my advice - been here too many times before.

If you alias to another panel (there are quite a few good 707 panels around) you'll get a flyable aircraft.

My original comments still apply though

But hey - cmon give the guy a chance. Not too much wrong with this model and livery

Not too much wrong? I can

OK, last word on this one.

The textures in the zip are supposed to be DXT3 with alpha 0 mips but they obviously have a problem as they go blurry.

So for those who know what they're doing, if you open the _T.bmp in each texture folder as an extended bmp in DXTBmp.exe and then resave it in the same format with 0 mips, as if like magic the textures clean up real good.

Still a bit of bleed through and flashing patches here and there but a big improvement straight away for just 2 or 3 minutes work.

I must admit that I've got 'choosy' about downloads.  I like aeroplanes where EVERYTHING is modelled correctly, including the panel and the flying characteristics.

I tried one of the HJG 707s, for example, and it didn't 'grab' me.  The aircraft.cfg and sounds were from the default 737, and they'd used the default 747 panel.

That's where David Maltby (the guy whose site I put on earlier) scores with me.  As far as I know, his aeroplanes fly like the originals.  The Comet 4 is well worth trying, by the way - and you can do your own 'Historic Flights' if you like.

Try flying Heathrow-Kennedy in 'real weather', for example.  Watch the fuel (he gives you an excellent checklist that tells you the range remaining) and be ready to divert to Gander if it doesn't look like stretching - that's what they had to do in real life!

I'll maybe have to wait for Captainsim's payware 707 - if they ever finish it, and if it doesn't cost too much!  :)

Yep, this is nowhere near that quality but I give you a thought.

All of the 'feel', fuel usage, engine and flight characteristics etc are contained in the air and cfg files and you can edit these to make them as near 'perfect' as possible.

I have DM's 1-11s which I love to bits and fly a lot. They don't have VCs and neither as I recall as I don't have it on my current disk, does the Comet-IV. So when you are 'flying' from LHR to JFK you are behind a 2D panel and the flight characteristics you are experiencing bear no relationship to any part of the visual model!

You only savour the delights of a pretty model during the flight if you step outside for a look or at the beginning and end when you get a chance to play with all the little gadgets, opening hatches and doors and things. Gives you a chance to go 'Coooo, ain't that clever!' - but in reality adds little or nothing to the 'flying' experience'

So on those criteria this plane doesn't stack up that badly. I personally don't worry too much about the gadgets. Once you've seen em and played with em once I don't need em any more. That's why I don't have any Meljets now in my sim (sacrilege they all cry!) - I just can't see the point of taking that enormous frame rate hit.

And it's also why I'm spending more and more time on scenery (when I have the time!), panels and FDEs, because they I think are the main factors that influence realism for me. The aircraft itself now, and it even surprises me, comes into 4th place on that score.

Weird ideas ole Rolerball's got, you're all thinking!

Agree entirely, RollerBall.

Absolutely - he's brilliant. Probably the best around right now.

I'm not a great VC fan myself. I prefer flying with a great 2D panel and views, so it was useful to get the instructions which were posted by WebbPA I think it was a couple of weeks ago for removing VCs from planes that had them.

Unfortunately a lot of designers have been persuaded that a poor VC is better than none at all and it's great to be able to get rid of em now and use the panels and views of your choice.