From the X-Plane Developer Blog page:

10.04 Release Candidate 3 and Future PatchesPosted on March 18, 2012 by Ben SupnikFirst: X-Plane 10.04 rc3 is live – please grab it – make sure to check “get betas” to get this patch! (If you are already using 10.04 betas, simply go to the About box to update.) Because this is a release candidate (we think it’s good to go but we’re not sure) you must still check “get betas” – that check box should really be “get crazy experimental stuff that is not yet officially released to the world.”I think we are reaching the point where we can slow down the rate of patches just a bit. Like past X-Plane releases, the first patches came out fast and furious, because we wanted to get critical bug fixes to as many users as possible. We are now reaching a point where we can slow down and get more done between each beta, which I think will mean better rate of improvement for the sim overall.Of course, if we get a really huge bug fix (e.g. an ATI performance boost or a fix for NVidia start hangs) we’ll cut a tiny patch off of 10.04 immediately; our source control system lets us do an incremental update very easily.So with the next patch we will be able to work on some bigger bugs:

• I think the next patch won’t be a full 64-bit patch, but it will contain a lot of the ground-work to get 64-bit working. We’ve already started on this code; by splitting it over two patches we can more rapidly deal with any kind of incompatibility introduced by the newer code. (Our goal is of course to make sure that any machine running 10.04 can run the 32-bit version of X-Plane when we support both bit depths.)
• Austin received a lot of feedback about the UI while we were in Mallorca, and he has already started this work, although I am not sure what will be released when.
• I will be digging into “
  ” (our internal name for the many weird shapes the roads take when the road-placement code goes haywire). This is going to require some pretty major work to the road generation code, but of course it’s a critical fix.
• While the volume of complaints about performance have gone down, there are still one or two performance tuning changes I want to get into the sim.

There are only about four things I work on when I am in the office: performance, fixing bugs, developer tools, and the installer. Hopefully with 10.04 installer work is done for a while and I can get one major area off my plate. This should leave more time for developer tools and documents, which I try to leave a fixed amount of time for every week.

This is very welcome news, and should open some previously closed or half closed doors. You want more memory Xplane, here ya go. :smile:Glen P.S. And it looks like maybe some UI changes / enhancements for those concerned.

P.S. And it looks like maybe some UI changes / enhancements for those concerned.

Life is good!

Good times! I must say performance (for me) has come on leaps and bounds since the initial release. I can now run much higher object densities and clouds than I could before, and even sometimes HDR!My pet peeve at the moment is still the rolling I seem to be experiencing with certain prop aircraft, mainly Carenado and also the default Baron and King Air exhibit similar behaviour. I know it can be overcome by a bit of aileron trim, but this is not the case in real life and is a bit of a realism killer for me (I'm very OCD)!!

Good times! I must say performance (for me) has come on leaps and bounds since the initial release. I can now run much higher object densities and clouds than I could before, and even sometimes HDR!My pet peeve at the moment is still the rolling I seem to be experiencing with certain prop aircraft, mainly Carenado and also the default Baron and King Air exhibit similar behaviour. I know it can be overcome by a bit of aileron trim, but this is not the case in real life and is a bit of a realism killer for me (I'm very OCD)!!

On the roll issue, have you contacted Carenado to see if they are willing to be open about this issue, regardless of whether it is a their problem or Laminar's?

So true Tom...Please, wake me up when LR does something about it... :-) Meanwhile I am dreamming another dream....

My pet peeve at the moment is still the rolling I seem to be experiencing with certain prop aircraft, mainly Carenado and also the default Baron and King Air exhibit similar behaviour. I know it can be overcome by a bit of aileron trim, but this is not the case in real life and is a bit of a realism killer for me (I'm very OCD)!!

Very refreshing news! :(

If I remember correctly, someone on the Aerosoft forums filed a bug with Austin about the unstable behavior of the C172. This is going to be fixed for v10.05

On the roll issue, have you contacted Carenado to see if they are willing to be open about this issue, regardless of whether it is a their problem or Laminar's?

I did send an email to Carenado specifically about the right-roll behaviour on the F33A, and got a reply almost straight away.This is pretty much what I got back:

This plane is not officially supported in XPv10 yet. We know that there have been some slight changes to the aerodynamics in 10 that remain unaccounted for in the Bonanza and other Carenado titles. As mentioned on the Carenado website, we do not claim our products to be 100% X-Plane 10 compliant. At this point, XPv10 is still a moving target, and if we were to release planes that are calibrated for v10, these calibrations might become obsolete by the next update of X-Plane.What you are describing, however, sounds like the following: The aircraft is calibrated to fly fairly straight at cruise power settings. This is taking into account torque compensation. When the engine power is reduced, the engine torque's force which keeps the plane balanced is reduced, which leads to the other forces taking the upper hand, causing a right bank. This is normal and to be expected. Real-world F33 pilots have confirmed such behaviour. Perhaps this behaviour is exacerbated in v10, due to the flight physics calibrations there.

It does it at cruise power as well! I have noticed it's not quite so severe in XP9, but is still there.Strangely, the Baron and King Air in default XP continually roll left rather than right. The only aircraft I've found so far which don't roll like that are the X-Aviation Duchess, and the freeware Archer III from the Org, and of course any jet aircraft. Even the C130 introduced in Beta 7 rolls left without any trim.

I did send an email to Carenado specifically about the right-roll behaviour on the F33A, and got a reply almost straight away.This is pretty much what I got back:It does it at cruise power as well! I have noticed it's not quite so severe in XP9, but is still there.Strangely, the Baron and King Air in default XP continually roll left rather than right. The only aircraft I've found so far which don't roll like that are the X-Aviation Duchess, and the freeware Archer III from the Org, and of course any jet aircraft. Even the C130 introduced in Beta 7 rolls left without any trim.

What a wonderful response from Carenado!! I wish Laminar would learn from this response. This is all it takes to calm the troops. What is it going to take in order to convince Laminar that they are not dealing with a bunch of Neanderthal's. My hat comes off to Carenado. I love this company.Bob

Can't wait for next update!

So, in a nutshell, what will the 64bit version do for us?Bob

Solve the Out Of Memory errors ("bad alloc") for those who experienced them. In the long run, it will allow X-P to use more than 4GB of memory and hence more complexity for scenery etc.

My pet peeve at the moment is still the rolling I seem to be experiencing with certain prop aircraft, mainly Carenado and also the default Baron and King Air exhibit similar behaviour. I know it can be overcome by a bit of aileron trim, but this is not the case in real life and is a bit of a realism killer for me (I'm very OCD)!!

It doesn't bug me too much. I've always got aileron trim assigned to my Saitek X-52 hat switch. My RV kitbuilt airplane has aileron trim on it's hat switch also. I used it all the time, for pilot/passenger/fuel imbalance. As mentioned by Carenado in a few responses down, there will be a tendency to roll right, of power if pulled off (at higher airspeeds). This would be due to the fact that most single engine planes have the engine canted on an angle, as well as built in vertical stabilizer offset, or trim tabs to compensate for torque and slipstream when under power. As to how much actual roll or yaw to the right should be experienced...........I don't really know. Like Geofa, I don't have a tendency to just pull power to idle either. Probably would just do it, to check for a simulation. Like Carenado said, these planes are adjusted to fly straight with cruise settings. My RV has a fixed rudder trim tab. It's really only good for a limited range of cruise settings. Unless compensated for, the ball is going to be out.........without also having an adjustable rudder trim tab or yaw damper.Never the less, I just took the Carenado Bonanza up in 10............trimmed it out with aileron trim, and it stays there within reason. I don't expect it to function like an auto-pilot. Did bank to the right when power is pulled back. Real planes do that too ( or at least yaw) . I just really don't pay attention if it's more roll or yaw. I just seem to automatically compensate, as stick forces are very light. And, it wouldn't work to just generalize if it's roll or yaw, or a combination of both. For example, high wing Cessnas use a cam adjustment to adjust the rear spars for incidence after a test flight. This could easily cause some slight roll, when power is reduced, depending on airspeeds. Generalization is bad. Someone thought the "Flight RV" model was off..........because it pitched down with flap extention. But, unlike a high wing Cessna which balooons up with flaps, the RV model was correct.At the end of the day............I just don't know exactly what the real F33 would "exactly" do, in a power off, high speed descent.

Solve the Out Of Memory errors ("bad alloc") for those who experienced them. In the long run, it will allow X-P to use more than 4GB of memory and hence more complexity for scenery etc.

Even though there are a number of areas that really are going to require some fixes, I have never experienced an OOM. But then again, I can only run for 10 minutes at a time. But even with those short times, I have maxed out most areas with the exception of not using HDR.Bob

64bit will really open up a lot of possibilities for X-Plane! For example if PMDG follows through with it's plans to develop for it. Right now the NGX in FSX takes it to it's limits. Many still have problems getting enough system resources to run it. Right now they may face the same issues in XP. If the App is made 64-bit, it will allow them to make the model and future ones even more detailed in graphics and systems.