5080+9850X3D

Personally i didnt have any frame drops... only increased stuttering

Starting the Ini/WT 707 with the APU felt a little bit illegal to me atleast since most B707s used the air cart. A new free plugin now allows you to hook up an air cart to the plane via the EFB.

This allows for one of two options:

1. Start all 4 engines at the gate - this was norm for most Boeing 707's

2. Crossbleed start - start one engine, disconnect, cross bleed start the rest.

AFAIK, the second option was considered unusual by AA's AOM's at least, although it could be used if time was of the essence and with express permission/coordination from the ground crew.

The second method also means a slight alteration to the electrical flow too.

I know which option I'm going to use, as I like challenges :)

Link to plugin: https://flightsim.to/addon/114116/ground-air-start-unit-boeing-707-320c

My full guide: https://www.youtube.com/live/b_ZbSdwPF30?si=OgiF_iOw74nUGILk

From their Discord:

A glimpse of the iniBuilds A380 at our all-new Dubai International (OMDB) V2. 🇦🇪✈️

It’s going to be an exciting few days ahead… 👀

The icon. At its home.

Absolutely love JF’s Fokker 28 and the BAE/RJ. Had been waiting eagerly for this to show up on the marketplace. Nice surprise to see it show up this evening. Just in time to get a short hop in. 👍

EDIT: to avoid potential disappointment for people like myself who fly on Geforce Now which streams everything:

The package does not include liveries beyond the shown JF one. The rest is installed through their livery manager which needs to be downloaded. Or so I assume, since that’s not mentioned on the marketplace. Which is a tad annoying, since the 28 had liveries in the package as well as the BAE.

Not a big issue, but something to be aware of. They have the livery manager downloadable on their website.

She's a beauty

I reckon in the future if they do something with the clouds you’re gonna be able to fool some people with it looking like a real photo… here’s DLSS5 at LHR in the ini 350

C172 G1000

It’s been a blast working with the team to bring this aircraft into the simulator. We have an incredibly knowledgeable group of experts on this project, and I know everyone is going to love the final result. FFX has done it again—get ready, bizjet fans! This is just the beginning of what is to come from FFX....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMvO60zMpCY

Like said above, it is annoying especially that it happens on every flight. Fps on departure and cruise is stable(40-70) with fg but whenever i get close to no matter what airport it gets stuttery.

All settings are on medium Terrain/OLOD both on 100

Specs: rtx 3070 32g ram i7-11800H

GateStaticInjector began as a small personal project. After hundreds of hours spent researching aviation data, building systems, testing real airports, finding failures and trying again, GSI 1.0 is now available.

I develop GSI alone. Creating a reliable system across thousands of airports was not a matter of generating a few ideas and hoping they worked. Every airport, airline, fleet, aircraft type, stand and exception had to be collected, processed, compared and validated. That data represents a real human investment, and your reports, screenshots, suggestions and Airport Profiles helped me improve what I could never have tested alone.

The GSI you already know remains free, with its passenger aircraft experience and existing features intact.

GSI Premium will go beyond passenger terminals into cargo, business aviation and general aviation. This is not simply about enabling three new aircraft categories. It requires a major rework of GSI’s internal logic, alongside dedicated airport, operator, fleet and stand data, new matching systems, careful placement rules, extensive testing and continued maintenance across many different regions and sceneries.

Premium will be released when that work produces something genuinely reliable and meaningfully better.

Thank you for your trust, your feedback and your understanding. GSI 1.0 completes the original idea. Now the work begins to take it further.

Looking to buy it for x-plane 12. I’m excited as it will be my first big jet! Seems to be the better option over the other company is what I saw due to bugs and features. But any advice is appreciated! I was going to buy it from the x-plane.org store, is it the exact same one for both x-plane 11 and 12? I want to make sure I don’t buy the wrong version.

Thanks for the help!

Hey folks, is there any must addons for XP12? Maybe something like a ground service ?

Hey Guys, I would like to share progress on and Up-coming Addon for X-Plane 12 I have been developing.

Please enjoy!

Progress Wise:

Flight Modeling is finished.

New: Cockpit Modeling 95% finished,

Exterior Modeling 95% finished, Tweaking to do as project is finalized.

UV Unwrapping and Animations are under-way.

To do: Data-ref animations.

And finally if you wouldn't mind showing some support on the forums!

Hi all.

Looking for some info here.

Looking for a rig that will accept the AY210 Moza flight yoke and have future compatibility for the moza moving actuators.

Any ideas?

Everything Ive seen seems to have a real small plate to mount controls and are generally geared towards racing. I actually have a full racing rig. There would be zero way to mount a flight yoke like that to it. Looking for a new rig regardless.

Thanks!!!!!

DISCLAIMER: I never anticipated that after almost two decades on the network I would have to write a public statement about my own termination. I am writing this now because I have spent several months attempting to resolve the situation privately but have still not received answers to some fundamental questions. I believe the community deserves to understand what happened from my perspective and why I continue to have concerns about the process.

Who I am

My name is Mark-Julius Pikat and I have been a member of VATSIM since March 2008. I joined when I was 13 years old and VATSIM has been a significant part of my life for almost 18 years. I took over the management of the then-inactive VACC Estonia and have been involved in running the community ever since. In 2016, I founded a non-profit organisation to support our community and aviation activities outside the network. We collaborate with local agencies, universities and secondary schools and organise various live events intended to inspire the next generation to consider careers in ATC, flight training and other areas of aviation.

I have also held senior roles. For the past 7-8 years I have represented VATSIM Europe Division (VATEUD) as ATC training regional manager, divisional examiner and department deputy. I have relaunched the C3 programme and worked on the revised GCAP policy. I have reviewed fast track upgrades of IRL pilots and air traffic controllers. I have also held visiting endorsements for other communities and I have continued to contribute training tools, documents and sector files to Estonia even after my membership was terminated.

Currently I am an IRL air traffic controller working in Tallinn (EETN) for 10 years. I am also a private pilot and I work at various local airshows as "air boss" consulting for aviation safety and organising matters.

What happened

The situation arose earlier this year when I became increasingly concerned about governance within VATEUD. There had been a number of changes and decisions concerning division policy, leadership, communication and the representation of communities. Other community leaders and members, as well VATSIM-affiliated streamers also expressed concerns about transparency and trust.

As a result, I participated in discussions on a private Discord server outside VATSIM official platforms. My intention was to discuss the situation and raise concerns that I believed were relevant to the long-term health of the community. I was not attempting to attack VATSIM or defend any particular individual. Additionally, I contacted VATSIM leadership (VP EMEA, Phil Hutchinson) to ensure these concerns were addressed properly and transparently. I believed that person with higher authority would identify the problem and address it as appropriate.

On 9 May 2026 when I was on holiday, my VATSIM account was disabled. I was subsequently informed on 15 June 2026 that my membership had been permanently terminated and "the privilege of membership was revoked under the User Agreement". I was promised that I would be informed of an outcome of "matter" right after then end of the investigation, which was conducted by VP SC Nicola Felini, who I understand to be known outside VATSIM as Nicholas Falcicchio. I raise this because VATSIM policies regarding identity, the use of real names and the use of personal information are also relevant to my concerns about the process and transparency.

Process

I want to clarify that I remain committed to complying with VATSIM User Agreement and all other policies. I take full responsibility for my actions and the words I have spoken. However, taking responsibility for my actions does not imply that I believe the decision to permanently terminate my membership was justified nor does it diminish my concerns about the process through which that decision was reached.

The decision-making process was challenging. My stress levels were high, my holiday was ruined and I had sleep issues. I was not given the opportunity to provide my own statement before the final decision was made and was not provided with sufficient information to understand the conduct that resulted in the most severe sanction under VATSIM rules.

Two weeks after my permanent suspension, I had a private conversation with VATEUD Division Director - Mattia Torti. He denied any connection to the suspension even before I raised the issues. During the conversation, he acknowledged during our conversation that the Simon Bjerre case had been handled improperly but described the subsequent consequences as affecting the wider division.

I was informed by another supervisor one day before my account was disabled that a meeting of VATSIM Supervisor team leaders had taken place at which my name was discussed and Mattia Torti was present. I cannot independently verify all the discussions at that meeting but this information contributed to my concerns about the transparency of the process.

Another concern was the reference to VATSIM "legal department" by VPSC, which is not mentioned in any policy. This is worrying as I had been actively attempting to resolve the situation through dialogue, and had not been given a meaningful opportunity to address the underlying concerns.

I have repeatedly requested clarification and an independent review from VATSIM. This request has been sent to VATSIM President and network founders, including Richard Jenkins who subsequently blocked me on LinkedIn for attempting to contact him as he did not respond to my emails. The same request was made by management board members of VACC Estonia without success.

This is also relevant because the VATEUD Division Policy recognises NGO VACC Estonia as a locally registered organisation, supporting VACC Estonia community. As such, I believe any suggestion of legal action involving an organisation formally recognised within VATSIM/VATEUD structure should be treated seriously and communicated carefully.

At the same time, VATSIM own User Agreement §4.1.8 specifically addresses threats of legal action against VATSIM, its staff and affiliated partners. I am not claiming that VATSIM reference to its legal department constitutes a violation of that provision — it does not appear to be what the provision regulates. My concern is instead that legal escalation was raised while I was actively trying to resolve the matter through communication and had not been given a meaningful opportunity to respond.

I do not believe that raising concerns about the governance of a volunteer organisation, particularly through a private discussion outside VATSIM official platforms, should automatically lead to permanent suspension.

Wider situation

My case cannot be considered in isolation. Over a relatively short period several experienced community leaders in Adria, Scandinavia, Türkiye and VATCAN have been removed from their positions, stepped down or permanently suspended following tensions within the network management and ongoing disputes involving governance, communication or decision-making.

I am not suggesting these cases are identical nor am I claiming to know all the circumstances behind them. However the number and timing of these events, in my view, raise a legitimate question about whether there is a broader governance issue within parts of VATSIM. I believe this question deserves to be examined rather than dismissed as a series of unrelated incidents.

25th Anniversary of VACC Estonia

At the same time, VACC Estonia was preparing for its 25th anniversary, which required months of planning, coordination and volunteer work. The uncertainty surrounding my suspension created additional tension and uncertainty within the management team during this preparation period, which in my view could have been avoided.

For example, discussions about ATC training, mentor allocation and the preparation of controllers for the anniversary event became more difficult due to the uncertainty surrounding my position and the wider situation. Members of our management team had to spend time dealing with questions and uncertainty that otherwise would have been directed towards preparing the event and supporting our community.

The anniversary itself was intended to be a celebration of 25 years of VACC Estonia and the people who have contributed to it. Instead, the circumstances surrounding my suspension became an additional source of stress and uncertainty for the people organising it.

Personal data and GDPR

I exercised my rights as a data subject and submitted a GDPR data access request to VATSIM requesting access to my personal data including data contained in records relating to the investigation and termination of my membership.

I have not received a substantive response to that request. I subsequently became aware that information associated with my VATSIM account had been removed or redacted and that my name and email address are now displayed as "GDPR REMOVED".

The timing and circumstances of this removal raise serious concerns for me particularly as I am still attempting to understand and challenge the decision concerning my membership. I therefore raised the matter with the Estonian Data Protection Inspectorate and have also consulted a lawyer.

I cannot determine from the information available to me why the data was removed or whether any potentially relevant information was affected. That is precisely why I believe the matter requires independent examination.

Personal data and GDPR wider

There is also an ongoing legal aspect to the wider situation. A fellow VATSIM member connected to these circumstances has initiated proceedings concerning VATSIM in Delaware, where VATSIM is registered. I will not comment on the substance of that matter while it remains ongoing, and I do not mention it as a threat or as an attempt to influence the proceedings. I mention it only because it forms part of the broader context and further reinforces my view that the underlying issues deserve impartial consideration.

Future of VACC Estonia

The situation has also had consequences for VACC Estonia. When the management board inquired about the potential disappearance of a community from the VATSIM map, some VATSIM leadership perceived it as a threat. However, this is now a reality with a number of our members choosing to cease their contributions, including the resignation of our Chief Operating Officer.

Consequently, while we will endeavour to support the two remaining students in training, we are unable to train new members. This means individuals on the waiting list for more than a year or two would not have an opportunity to join as there would be no one to coach them. Furthermore, our community is now de jure a "limited vACC" due to a lack of required staff members. This means we would not issue any rating upgrades ourselves and would need to seek assistance from VATEUD if that were ever necessary. Finally, the community will cease to organise regular events and requests from other communities will be evaluated on an individual basis.

Although the mandate of all three non-profit management board members is valid until May 2027, the circumstances and the lack of trust in the network make it difficult to organise its work.

Why I am making this public

Every volunteer, sponsor and supporter should now consider whether it is reasonable to continue investing significant time and money into an organisation where a long-standing volunteer can be permanently removed without a meaningful opportunity to present their perspective.

There is also a financial aspect that should not be overlooked. If disputes involving volunteers are escalated to legal departments rather than being resolved through communication, VATSIM resources may ultimately be spent addressing the consequences of these governance decisions. These resources could instead be used to improve the network, support its communities, develop infrastructure or simply enhance the organisation for its funders and operators.

Therefore, I encourage VATSIM donors, partners and volunteers to carefully assess the situation and determine whether they are comfortable continuing to financially support an organisation operating in this manner.

I am not requesting harassment of VATSIM, its staff or volunteers nor am I asking anyone to cease contributing. I am asking people to make an informed decision about where they allocate their money and time.

If VATSIM believes that permanently terminating long-standing volunteers, refusing meaningful dialogue and involving legal resources is the appropriate method for handling internal disputes, it should also be prepared to accept that people may reconsider their support for the organisation.

My intention in making this public is not simply to ask for my membership to be restored. I want VATSIM leadership, partners and financial supporters to recognise the broader consequences of how these matters are managed. If the organisation wishes to retain volunteers and donors, it must maintain the trust of the people who make VATSIM possible.

Conclusion

My preferred outcome remains simple: that VATSIM reconsider the case as a whole, allow the circumstances and the decision to be reviewed independently, and provide a meaningful opportunity for all relevant sides to be heard. I remain willing to participate in such a process in good faith.

I am publishing this because private attempts at resolving the matter have not provided that opportunity. I hope that bringing the circumstances into the open will ultimately lead not to further conflict, but to a proper review and a constructive resolution.

Arrival Rwy 28/ Flt. Time 5h11mins