This is something that I've noticed "casually" when comparing NGX with older PMDG offerings like 747 Queen of the Skies, and I was wondering if ti would be useful in any way in the quest for extra frames per second in NGX aircraft.

 

For a very long time I've wondered why it is that when you "get up" from the captains seat and float your camera to the rear of the plane in the 737NGX using something like EZDok, tha graphics in the main cabin area are, well, "horrible". By this I mean the textures are extremely low resolution, and blocky, and the geometric complexity of things like the seats are extremely minimalist.

 

For a long time, my assumption in this regard was along the lines of, "You don't see it much, so why does it matter?" and all of my assumptions of why it looked so "bad" proceeded from there. Now please understand, that I don't mean that the graphics back there are repelling or anything like that, but only that compared to the VC, they're significantly lackluster. And not only that, it was confusing to me because in a MUCH earlier offering (the 747) the area behind the VC was an order of magnitude better graphically! My assumption here was that the NGX programmers just identified it as non-essential and even though they easily could have embellished it every bit as well as the 747, they decided to concentrate on the meat of the project.

 

Fast forward to today. I reloaded my copy of 747 Queen of the Skies on a whim because after flying so many hours in the 737NGX, I was looking for something just a bit different as a diversion. Everything loaded up perfectly and it wasn't long before I was into the skies in a Qantas livery'd GE powered 747.

 

The first thing I noticed was that the frame rates at several of my purchased scenery airports was measureably better than in the NGX, I assume owing to the fact that the 747 is not as "High Fidelity" a simulation as the NGX and therefore less taxing on the CPU, but what REALLY surprised me was when I used EZDok to take a look at the area behind the main cabin (First Class). I was flying over the ocean so there was no sudden scenery to really cause it, but the moment I was in the first class cabin area, the FPS dropped to nearly half of what they were in the VC! When I turned away and looked back toward the VC things improved a bit but not very much. The better frame rates of previously only returned when I was back in the VC completely, the moment I returned to the rear cabin the frame rates dropped to half again.

 

What is more confusing is that if you are completely in the VC and looking backward the frame rates are still good, but lower than when you are looking forward toward what should be the more complex VC...

 

Once you step into the rear though and the first class cabin is actually drawn, again the FPS plummet to half. trying to look out the passenger's windows and moving around back there becomes a slide show.

 

What I am thinking about now is if PMDG recognized this performance hit (for whatever reason it happens) and downgraded the cabin in the NGX to combat it, knowing that if the textures were as crisp and the detail as good as in the 747, with the NGX higher demands on the CPU, the simulation would bog down.

 

Finally, to my question If the 747 cabin graphics are such a hit on frame rates, and the NGX much less so, I am still thinking that in some way they still have SOME effect on NGX frame rates, particularly if you are looking over your left shoulder while trying to spot your approach, etc (I use TrackIR)

 

If one were to delete the graphics that ARE used back there, changing them to black textures or in some way deleting them from being considered in ANY way. Would this help the frame rates in the VC? I know that things like the wings and cabin area are modelled even when in the VC because if you use view commands to "wander" outside of the VC, you can see them even though you never actually view them except in rare cases while flying (there are seperate models for VC view and External view)

 

If one were to find where the graphics for the "external parts" of the VC cockpit views are stored and change them to very small low resolution versions, would this help in any way? has it been done in some fashion before? I did a search and wasn't able to find anything on the subject.

David,

 

The cabin on all of our products is not meant to be something you go and walk through on the inside - it's meant to be seen from outside when in a view of the external model so that there's not just empty space there. We've always had a no virtual cabin policy - we focus on the cockpit as far as the high resolution stuff goes and we aren't making a passenger simulator beyond standard things like the wingview presets.

 

I don't believe any specific intent was made to reduce the quality of the NGX's cabin textures vs older products - the thing though is that we've learned a ton since the 747 - the FSX version was made in 2006 and we made the MD-11 and J41 after it before making the NGX. The NGX is orders of magnitude more efficient in the modelling and texturing - that's likely why you're seeing a difference.

David,

 

The cabin on all of our products is not meant to be something you go and walk through on the inside - it's meant to be seen from outside when in a view of the external model so that there's not just empty space there.

Don't even those basic cabin polygons reduce frame rates though? To be honest, I'd much rather have opaque windows and no interior modelling if it meant better frame rates.

 

I've never felt the need to look too closely at the cabin windows. I'm too busy enjoying the view from the flightdeck.

I created a camera view in opus that looks like a passenger sitting at a window seat in the cabin. I spent an awful long time matching the position and zoom based on many rides as a passenger. Every once in a while I check it and sure enough, if its raining or snowing outside, it appears to also be raining inside !

Eric W