MAY SALE: FS Dream Team & Cloud 9

[CFIJose 5,485]

I think that ******* mentioned this as being driven by the use of transparency AA at those airports. You could, for testing purposes, try a run without transparency AA to find out if this feature causes the pauses there.******* posted a video, showing this pause when TAA is enabled. See here. http://forum.avsim.n...ost__p__1887728And thanks for the HU about the sales action.

I'm referring to the airport loading a few miles away. That's the pause I speaking about.Back to the sale. Is KLAX available yet? :(

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

I'm referring to the airport loading a few miles away. That's the pause I speaking about.

It's funny that for me KFLL is the only airport that seems to pause more than the others. KDFW seems really smooth in comparision. I have noticed that by eliminating the ships and cranes at the beach it helps and I can thank Umberto for the suggestion, but it still seems to happen at that airport more than the others. Hopefully, if it ends up getting brought up to KDFW/KLAX standard like Umberto said they may do with the existing sceneries, then maybe KFLL will be a little smoother in the loading. Of note, I also increase my POP UP box to 30 (MAX) when I am going to be flying into KFLL and that helps a bit as well.

Back to the sale. Is KLAX available yet? :(

There will be some good times ahead when we get KLAX, GSX, and the NGX :-)

[Benjamin J 751]

When KLAX comes around, I do hope the FPS will be okay. For some reason, KFLL seems to be a bit of a frame hog. See, I understand that I'll get 13-15FPS with FSDT KJFK when I have UTX, MegaSceneryEarth, ImageSim KLGA and Aerosoft Manhattan X installed. That seems only natural to me. So, I make do with what I have. Same for FSDT KORD: very dense sceneries, and understandably the FPS drops. But getting 15 or so FPS with KFLL? Where I have only UTX installed as an additional addon? Dunno, seems a bit strange. Could it be because KMIA is literally next door (don't have any addon scenery for that either, though)? At PHNL, for example, the FPS is good, even though I have MegaScenery Hawaii... it's not like there is more traffic at PHNL than at KFLL (at the times I tested, it was about the same traffic volume)

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

When KLAX comes around, I do hope the FPS will be okay. For some reason, KFLL seems to be a bit of a frame hog. See, I understand that I'll get 13-15FPS with FSDT KJFK when I have UTX, MegaSceneryEarth, ImageSim KLGA and Aerosoft Manhattan X installed. That seems only natural to me. So, I make do with what I have. Same for FSDT KORD: very dense sceneries, and understandably the FPS drops. But getting 15 or so FPS with KFLL? Where I have only UTX installed as an additional addon? Dunno, seems a bit strange. Could it be because KMIA is literally next door (don't have any addon scenery for that either, though)? At PHNL, for example, the FPS is good, even though I have MegaScenery Hawaii... it's not like there is more traffic at PHNL than at KFLL (at the times I tested, it was about the same traffic volume)

Ben, The reason that KFLL is a little harder on FPS as explained by Umberto a few times is due to the ships and shipping cranes in the ocean end of the runways. Those cranes in particular are not very FPS friendly, hence the reason areas like KSEA can hammer FPS. John Venema at ORBX has explained a few times the same in regards to the shipping cranes as being one of the performance factors in the Seattle area.The suggestion for better FPS at KFLL is to either turn your scenery complexity slider down to either Normal or Dense until those cranes and/or ships disappear. By doing so, you wont really miss any objects at the airport, but you will pick up some FPS and smoothness by getting rid of the cranes. Or you could do what I did so that I dont have to adjust my scenery complexity slider when I fly there, and build some exclude boxes to get rid of the cranes and leave the ships, or exclude both the ships and cranes. Its fairly simple. You can use ADEX to open the ADE that comes with the airport, then lock ADE to the sim and then slew over to those objects. Once in place a set of cross hairs will be on ADE showing your location as long as ADE is connected and locked to FSX. Then using your mouse you just put exlusion boxes over the ships/cranes or any other default objects you dont want FSX to render. I know it sound like a lot, but if you have ADEX already installed it should take you no longer than 10 minutes to do all of it. I would offer to send you my ADE but I have made some other modifications that I am unable to share at the moment.Just curious, but what CPU are you running and at what speed? As a comparision at KFLL with the ships and cranes excluded, but everything else still there and 100% traffic, plus a 3RD party Ft. Lauderdale downtown high rise scenery, I get between 25 to 30 FPS at that airport in the LDS 767 with my E8400 at 3.85 ghz. If your CPU is fast or faster than mine, you should be able to get FPS in that vicinity as well.

[Benjamin J 751]

Ben, The reason that KFLL is a little harder on FPS as explained by Umberto a few times is due to the ships and shipping cranes in the ocean end of the runways. Those cranes in particular are not very FPS friendly, hence the reason areas like KSEA can hammer FPS. John Venema at ORBX has explained a few times the same in regards to the shipping cranes as being one of the performance factors in the Seattle area.The suggestion for better FPS at KFLL is to either turn your scenery complexity slider down to either Normal or Dense until those cranes and/or ships disappear. By doing so, you wont really miss any objects at the airport, but you will pick up some FPS and smoothness by getting rid of the cranes. Or you could do what I did so that I dont have to adjust my scenery complexity slider when I fly there, and build some exclude boxes to get rid of the cranes and leave the ships, or exclude both the ships and cranes. Its fairly simple. You can use ADEX to open the ADE that comes with the airport, then lock ADE to the sim and then slew over to those objects. Once in place a set of cross hairs will be on ADE showing your location as long as ADE is connected and locked to FSX. Then using your mouse you just put exlusion boxes over the ships/cranes or any other default objects you dont want FSX to render. I know it sound like a lot, but if you have ADEX already installed it should take you no longer than 10 minutes to do all of it. I would offer to send you my ADE but I have made some other modifications that I am unable to share at the moment.Just curious, but what CPU are you running and at what speed? As a comparision at KFLL with the ships and cranes excluded, but everything else still there and 100% traffic, plus a 3RD party Ft. Lauderdale downtown high rise scenery, I get between 25 to 30 FPS at that airport in the LDS 767 with my E8400 at 3.85 ghz. If your CPU is fast or faster than mine, you should be able to get FPS in that vicinity as well.

Thanks for the explanation, I suspected that the cranes and such were what made the difference, but I wasn't aware that Umberto had given an explanation about that (didn't bother to look for more about this since I just accepted that I lower my sliders). To be honest, I have never in my life made an exclude box and have therefor absolutely no idea how to do it, so I'll gonna have to learn it. But, rather do the effort to learn it than lower those sliders... Thanks for your quick guide though, should definitely help!Out of curiosity, is this also the reason that FlyTampa's Boston returns low FPS? I can't check since I'm not at a FSX computer, but are there any cranes there that by any chance hit the FPS considerably (I'm asking because the airport sits near a harbour)?I have an Intel i5 Quad core processor @ 2.8 gHz. Is that better than what you have (I have no idea about all the hardware and what's better...)? In my experience the LDS767 is the most FPS friendly jetliner I have installed right now. It has always performed better than all PMDG aircraft, QW757, Aerosoft Airbus and some others. I'm hoping it will end up returning good FPS when the cranes are away. With all the addons I mentioned previously and sliders lowered to a medium/high position, I can get around 20FPS at KJFK.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

Thanks for the explanation, I suspected that the cranes and such were what made the difference, but I wasn't aware that Umberto had given an explanation about that (didn't bother to look for more about this since I just accepted that I lower my sliders). To be honest, I have never in my life made an exclude box and have therefor absolutely no idea how to do it, so I'll gonna have to learn it. But, rather do the effort to learn it than lower those sliders... Thanks for your quick guide though, should definitely help!

Yeah, its easy to learn ADEX and built the exclusion boxes, plus all the other cool stuff you can do with ADEX. I would recommend one of these days installing it and giving it a shot since there is so much you can use it for and its really easy to use. You will need to install the SDK as well as the appropriate updates that match your version of FSX.

Out of curiosity, is this also the reason that FlyTampa's Boston returns low FPS? I can't check since I'm not at a FSX computer, but are there any cranes there that by any chance hit the FPS considerably (I'm asking because the airport sits near a harbour)?

Off the top of my head I cant say for sure if Boston has the cranes but I am pretty sure it does. They also included extra boats in the harbor that you could disable just from remaning the bgls. Probably one of the FPS hits also come from the airport being so close to downtown and all the high rise buildings. However, you could build some exlcude boxes attached to the ADE file it came with and see if removing them makes a difference. I have never modified that airport but get a solid 25 to 30 FPS in most of my a/c.

I have an Intel i5 Quad core processor @ 2.8 gHz. Is that better than what you have (I have no idea about all the hardware and what's better...)? In my experience the LDS767 is the most FPS friendly jetliner I have installed right now. It has always performed better than all PMDG aircraft, QW757, Aerosoft Airbus and some others. I'm hoping it will end up returning good FPS when the cranes are away. With all the addons I mentioned previously and sliders lowered to a medium/high position, I can get around 20FPS at KJFK.

Yes, you have a better and newer CPU than I do, but the reason your getting a lot worse FPS than I am is becuase your running it at 2.8 ghz. If your comfortable with the idea, I would HIGHLY recommend you get some cooling and overclock that thing up to at least 3.6 to 3.8 ghz. That is most likely the best thing you could do to really improve your FSX experience. I wont say that its without risk, however with todays CPU and MOBO's its not as risky as it was 10 years ago. As well, if you keep the temps in check you shouldn't have to worry about your CPU frying or the life being shortened signifigantly.My CPU was originally stock at 3.0ghz and I went to where I am now at 3.85 and the difference is night and day when flying complex a/c into dense airports with a lot of trafic, etc. I am sure the fellows who frequent the hardware section could help you and walk you thru what you would need and how to proceed safely with an overclock. Once you do it, it will be like getting a new sim for free and your performance will be a lot better. I've had my CPU OC'ed for going on 3 years now, the computer is on 24/7 and I use FSX generally a few hours a day while I am working, and I have had zero issues with stability or anything of that nature.Anyway, it gives you something to think about if you want to get a better overall experience for very cheap, basically the cost of a CPU fan/cooler. I cant imagine running my CPU at the stock clock and when I do an upgrade to a new system, get Windows and FSX loaded up, an overclock will be my first order of business to get it really flying.

[NGXfanatic 85]

You know what would be a great idea, if someone could design replacement ground objects (like the cranes in Seattle/Fort Lauderdale, or certain buildings in NY) that are more frame rate friendly, shipped them with an "afcad" that places the exclusion rectangles for the user, and offers them as a new kind of scenery, just for the purpose of improving FPS in heavy scenery areas.I'm comfortable placing exclusion rectangles, as I have experience using that and other techniques (like land flattens) to get FS9 airports to work in FSX. But I have no clue how to hand place objects in FSX.The benefits would be incredible, akin to how frame rate friendly AI models are so efficient compared to the default FSX full featured AI. I have a few freeware city sceneries that add missing landmarks to the FSX world, how cool would it be to have some scenery objects to replace FSX default frame rate hogs, much like how freeware AI has replaced the FSX fantasy default AI.Just a thought...

[Benjamin J 751]

Yes, you have a better and newer CPU than I do, but the reason your getting a lot worse FPS than I am is becuase your running it at 2.8 ghz. If your comfortable with the idea, I would HIGHLY recommend you get some cooling and overclock that thing up to at least 3.6 to 3.8 ghz. That is most likely the best thing you could do to really improve your FSX experience. I wont say that its without risk, however with todays CPU and MOBO's its not as risky as it was 10 years ago. As well, if you keep the temps in check you shouldn't have to worry about your CPU frying or the life being shortened signifigantly.My CPU was originally stock at 3.0ghz and I went to where I am now at 3.85 and the difference is night and day when flying complex a/c into dense airports with a lot of trafic, etc. I am sure the fellows who frequent the hardware section could help you and walk you thru what you would need and how to proceed safely with an overclock. Once you do it, it will be like getting a new sim for free and your performance will be a lot better. I've had my CPU OC'ed for going on 3 years now, the computer is on 24/7 and I use FSX generally a few hours a day while I am working, and I have had zero issues with stability or anything of that nature.Anyway, it gives you something to think about if you want to get a better overall experience for very cheap, basically the cost of a CPU fan/cooler. I cant imagine running my CPU at the stock clock and when I do an upgrade to a new system, get Windows and FSX loaded up, an overclock will be my first order of business to get it really flying.

 <div><br></div><div> I'm afraid it's not that cheap for me: I have an iMac. So putting in a new cooling fan isn't really an option and I'd rather not OC because it'll break my warranty (still got it for 2,5 years). In time, I might get a "normal" PC for gaming. The 27" iMac support a video in option for as far as I know, so I already have all the peripherals necessary. From a quick build (not sure if what I chose is any good, I selected what had he highest rating...) I saw that a new computer could end up being 1200 Euros, but it'll have some nice specifications. So, I might do that some time in the future. Until that time, I'll simply drop the sliders where necessary. The only thing that's actually required, is a video card with a (mini) display port output, otherwise I can't hook it p to the iMac. Seems like ATI's newest card (the 6000 series) has i, so that  shouldn't be that big a problem. Put in a <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; ">AMD Radeon HD 6950 Chip based card by Gigabyte for now.</span></div>

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

I'm afraid it's not that cheap for me: I have an iMac. So putting in a new cooling fan isn't really an option and I'd rather not OC because it'll break my warranty (still got it for 2,5 years). In time, I might get a "normal" PC for gaming. The 27" iMac support a video in option for as far as I know, so I already have all the peripherals necessary. From a quick build (not sure if what I chose is any good, I selected what had he highest rating...) I saw that a new computer could end up being 1200 Euros, but it'll have some nice specifications. So, I might do that some time in the future. Until that time, I'll simply drop the sliders where necessary. The only thing that's actually required, is a video card with a (mini) display port output, otherwise I can't hook it p to the iMac. Seems like ATI's newest card (the 6000 series) has i, so that  shouldn't be that big a problem.

Oh, I had no idea you were running a Mac. Yeah thats one of the probelms with prebuilt factory comuters is that you can be limited up upgrading them or overclocking them since they usually have a locked BIOS. Years ago I ran a Dell P4 system before I knew anything about computers and was pretty happy with it until I wanted to upgrade parts or try an overclock. After that, I went the homebuilt route and have been very happy, and for gaming I will never buy a factory built Dell, HP, or any of those again.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

You know what would be a great idea, if someone could design replacement ground objects (like the cranes in Seattle/Fort Lauderdale, or certain buildings in NY) that are more frame rate friendly, shipped them with an "afcad" that places the exclusion rectangles for the user, and offers them as a new kind of scenery, just for the purpose of improving FPS in heavy scenery areas.

I have often wondered the same thing and though it would be a great idea, after all, how detailed does a shipping crane need to be for a flight sim.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

Bought Cairns, Brisbane, Melbourne and Tamworth, as they seem to be the airports were most of the traffic is. Downloading is exceptionally slow, however. i guess I'm not the only one that has bought 3GB worth of stuff Argh, completely forgot to get canberra. Doing that now...

Ben, considering the FPS you are getting at FlyTampa and FSDT airports, Cairns, Brisbane, Melbourne and Canberra are going to kill your FPS, especially Melbourne and Brisbane. You will most likely have to uncheck all options in the control panels and run without the ground polys. Tamworth might not be too bad though since its a pretty small hub.

[Benjamin J 751]

Well that's a bummer, especially because I already bought them. I'll install them throughout the weekend and see how it works. To be honest, I didn't expect much of Brisbane, not even when I bought it. I do have higher hopes for Melbourne, but I guess I can only wait and see.Funny thing is, the performance in FS2004 also wasn't great in places such as KJFK. Because of the UT:USA lights, the thunderstroms and all that (plus of course Aerosoft Manhattan, all the airport sceneries and such), FPS could be as low as 14, which is about the same I have now in FSX with pretty much the same addons without all the graphical enhancements that FSX offers. So FS2004 isn't really an option either. On top of that, 18FPS in FSX seems smoother than 18FPS in FS2004, but that might be a an illusion...

[ryanbatc 12,770]

I picked up DFW and LAS. I wonder if I'll have elevation issues with AI planes when on vatsim at dfw though? My tis is showing traffic but it's beneath the ground.

[virtuali 4,419]

I picked up DFW and LAS. I wonder if I'll have elevation issues with AI planes when on vatsim at dfw though? My tis is showing traffic but it's beneath the ground.

First, it would have been best if you posted on our support forum, since you'll have better chance to be supported there. In any case, whenever you have AI elevation issues, it's almost always due to another AFCAD in conflict from another product, usually AI traffic packages. Use the free FSX Airport Scanner to find AFCAD duplicates on FSX, and the free ScanAFD on FS9. With FS9, the main issue is, the default FS9 elevation at KDFW is wrong, and we fixed it but, if you have another AFCAD based on the default airport, it will create a conflict.

[ryanbatc 12,770]

I don't have any 3rd party AI or other afcads. I got the scenery up and running anyway!The AI appears normal while taxiing it's just that on my G1000 traffic appears on my screen and it's below my elevation. I wonder if it's a vehicle?