Does a full motion flight simulator also suffer stutter

[Guest Marvel]

hellojust wondering that does a full motion flight simulator also suffer stuttering from time to time? Like in the "complex" scenery or during approach into a dense airport. Oh another question, does the simulation software support worldwide scenery and database like FS does?

[Guest DaveKDEN]

Nope. They're optimized for simulation and are as smooth as silk. Realize though, they typically cost millions of dollars to build vs. a couple thousand $ for a state of the art desktop PC and a $70.00 piece of software.

[Guest Leesw]

The quality and detail of scenery is also generally much lower in commercial simulators than in FS2002, so the image generators have a lot less work to do.

[ulisses 1]

Some weeks ago I was in a real 767 simulator and it doesn't have stutters, everything is very smooth, but the scenery is basic, what I liked were the lights and elevations. Airports is very simple, only the necessary for training.After this experience, I confirmed my theory about complexity over smoothness, and my personal option is a simple scenery to get a smooth simulation, which increase the reality. Now in my FS2002 I avoid lots of 3D objects and textures, but I try to get nice weather and terrain.Ulisses

[Guest Marvel]

oh year, I'm also thinking of configuring my FS setup for the sake of smoothness too. Try to reduce the graphic settings as much as posible but maintain maxmum realism.

[brucek 38]

When you're actually flying, even in VFR, you don't notice the textures and the ground much as you're too busy (I fly in the Denver/ Front Range area of Colorado, and looking west are the magnificent snow-covered Rockies- but when I return from flying and someone asks "how did the mountains look?", I have to say I never looked at them!).I believe that in simulating flight, we rely on scenery and sound to further validate the flight experience. I know I do. And we're able to spend more time looking at that scenery too, I think it compensates for making us believe we are going somewhere when in reality we're really still in the living room. :)Interesting thread.Bruce.

[Midnight Music 252]

I find that limiting visibility goes a long way to helping FS2K2 smooth out. You will notice that when you download real weather, there is a lot of unlimited visibilty at airports. That's because in the real world anything over 10 miles is considered unlimited. Well, FS2K2 applies that as "completely" unlimited. Therefore, you computer tries to show you every nook and cranny of your scenery. This is unrealistic, and it really slows your computer down. The real world doesn't even look like that.I use FSUIPC to limit all visibilty. I set the clear to 10-20 miles depending on scenery density, and cloudy to 10 and rainy to 3-5 miles. It looks better and more real plus it helps the frame rates because the computer can relax a little more, only having to show what's immediately around you. The stutters don't disappear completely but it definately helps.Lee

[Guest progrmr]

>Some weeks ago I was in a real 767 simulator and it doesn't >have stutters, everything is very smooth, but the scenery is >basic, what I liked were the lights and elevations. Airports >is very simple, only the necessary for training. >After this experience, I confirmed my theory about >complexity over smoothness, and my personal option is a >simple scenery to get a smooth simulation, which increase >the reality. Now in my FS2002 I avoid lots of 3D objects and >textures, but I try to get nice weather and terrain. >>Ulisses Did the simulator do cloud layers at all? I'm really thinking about turning off all the major scenery stuff including clouds to get a totally smooth experience.

[Guest]

Nope, no stutters...

[Guest]

I've been on a few high end simulators and... you guessed it... "No stutter" Like someone mentioned before, these rigs are not cheap, and are often specialized for hi-fi simulation. One of the demonstrators I flew was a real basic setup, and cost $100,000. It ran on five processors, one of which was dedicated to pushing the gfx.Interestingly, the gfx were effective but not as graphically pleasing as LOMAC or FS2002.--T