Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

FIVE-BY-FIVE

X-Plane 10.30 Plans/Fixes from Ben's Blog

Recommended Posts

  • X-Plane 10.30: we don’t know when this will be or what will be in it with any kind of certainty, but there are some areas we’re looking at, like fog and visibility (where we have a mix of bugs and feature requests that might go well together). I think that even for 10.30 we’ll be in “fix what we already have” mode, not “add more stuff” mode; we want to make X-Plane 10 as stable, solid and fast as possible.

One of the goals of this roadmap is to make sure that 10.20 itself is a stable 64-bit release that authors can target and users can run. One reason why late bug fixes are going into 10.21 is to avoid delay in getting a solid, ‘final’ 64-bit release to everyone. (We also expect that at least one major bug that was not reported during the long 10.20 beta will pop up as soon as we hit “final”, hence the expectation of 10.21.)

Please do not turn the comments section into a guessing game about 10.30; we don’t have a precise list of what goes into it, and if we did I wouldn’t post it anyway, because it’s likely to change over time as we get new data.

I have some specific comments on airports and ATC, but that’ll be another post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

It's the last sentence that got my ears perked up.

 

My ears perk up (and droop back down)

 

Then perk up (then droop back down)

 

So frequently over XPX that I might eventually just take to the skies under my own ear-power like Dumbo.............

 

My attitude with XPX right now is that what will happen will happen when it happens. Usually. Except if not. -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fog and visibility... I hope they finally get the distant visibility issue fixed for good.

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm in the camp: whatever they're serving, I'm eating! I love XP10... and nothing but nothing could make me fly FSX again. Period. Fed up to DEATH with the convoluted incessant tweaking, even on bleeding edge hardware platform with dual-GPU processor (GTX690). When the new Keppler TITAN product releases soon, the graphics will render triple the speed of current-generation Keppler chips, you should see dazzling frames and (drumroll) 6GB of Vram on the video card (bring on max settings across the board).

 

My level of excitement about XP10 is nearly boundless. It's everything FSX 'might have been' if Microsoft hadn't given up and abandoned ship. Yes, I know there are more add-ons for FSX (I own a great many), but the 'rub' with those is they often 'fight' with each other, and some cause more pain than joy. As long as you back up your XPlane folder, you can plug things in and out to your heart's content and try them...

 

I've discovered 64-bit XPanel plug-in to run my Saitek Radio Panel (and other Saitek panels) in XP 10.20 64-bit (works flawlessly with Ramzzess B777) which is a gigantic boon if you are flying with realtime ATC (PilotEdge.net). PilotEdge is also running in 64-bits with no issues - so no more sitting on my hands praying that IVAO or VATSIM bring a 64-bit XPlane interface to the table.

 

I have only 1 rule:

 

All X-Plane all the time in 64-bits with all add-ons/plug-ins 64-bit compatible.

 

So far it's working great!

 

Whatever else Laminar does - it can only get better and better! I'm happy right now, anything beyond that is 'gravy'!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't want to type everything Robert did, but I agree with everything he said.

I am now with XP10...and will remain there. Smooth and hassle free.

 

Jerry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any reason for bashing FSX? Reminds me of all those divorced guys talking about their ex wifes all day. Do you miss her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any reason for bashing FSX? Reminds me of all those divorced guys talking about their ex wifes all day. Do you miss her?

 

I dunno... there's enough X-Plane bashing here in the X-Plane forums, so it's kind of a nice change of pace. I doubt FSX minds, though. It's just inanimate code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to 'bash' FSX - Lord knows I spent a considerable sum on her! I think for what FSX is - it's great. The 3PDs have been busy building it up to a pretty complex level. It just simply doesn't run well even on very state-of-the-art hardware, to suit me. After dumping several thousands into my handbuilt FSX system, and still having stutters and artifacts, lockups and CTD's- well enough was simply enough, and when I found out Laminar had been hard at work with 64-bit X-plane, I decided to "take a look" at what the competition had to offer.

 

All I can say to anyone who's debating is that the Ramzzess VMAX Boeing 777 Worldliner (now available in 64-bits at no additional charge) teamed up with XP10-64 and a few other add-ons brings XPlane into a very competitive appearance level vis-a-vis FSX, with the added bonus of being able to use ALL your system memory and ALL your CPU cores, and ALL your GPU VRAM.

 

Nvidia has announced the impending release of the new GTX-Titan Graphics card, which will run triple the rate of the current Keppler GPU - I can only imagine what THAT card would do in X-Plane, drumroll... it has SIX GB of VRAM on the card, not 2 or even 4 (4 is current max on Nvidia cards).

 

I think Austin Meyer is one incredible guy- he and his team, along with the flegling 3PDs already building for X-Plane are taking us to all-new altitudes of sim realism. Me? I'm just loving the ride and glad I lived long enough to see X-Plane 10.

 

Fog and visibility... I hope they finally get the distant visibility issue fixed for good.

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert, I can perfectly understand your position, and I appreciate your contributions regarding the 777!

 

It's always a delight to read comments from an enthusiastic user ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem. I know what you mean. But I would like XP to shine on it's own. And it does better and better...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

x plane is not the king of smoothest even in 64 bits, i know all people here have GTX680 and GTX690 so they aren't aware, but with my GTX660 i can drop to 24-25 fps in high density areas withouth HDR

and if i max everything i even get CTD at KJFK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just fix the fog, the air traffic flow, and please re-cut the auto-gen to make more accurate. Could go on about fixes, but one thing like about X-plane as low and slow flyer can pull up the local map see where the plane is and where ADF and VOR are to make navigation easy. . The auto-traffic and trains destroy are better than fsx, and sunset and sunrise real more realistic to me in X plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fed up to DEATH with the convoluted incessant tweaking, even on bleeding edge hardware platform with dual-GPU processor (GTX690).

 

That's because FSX is CPU bound and mostly ignores the GPU. It's all because ACES wrongly predicted that processor speeds would continue to exponentially increase. They never saw the multicore CPU/powerful GPU combo coming until they were too far into development to make any drastic changes to the code, and so you have a 7-year old flight simulator that can chug even on today's top of the line hardware.

 

x plane is not the king of smoothest even in 64 bits, i know all people here have GTX680 and GTX690 so they aren't aware, but with my GTX660 i can drop to 24-25 fps in high density areas withouth HDR and if i max everything i even get CTD at KJFK.

 

My advice: once you're done tweaking settings to your satisfaction, turn off the FPS indicator and just fly. You'll never even notice when framerates drop into the 20s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how well XP10 works with my specs, but I definitely want to see continuius improvementm such as:

- Terminal buildings

- Real world moon phase

- Seasonal textures

- Turn AI on/off

 

I look forward to future updates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert, I can perfectly understand your position, and I appreciate your contributions regarding the 777!

 

It's always a delight to read comments from an enthusiastic user ;-)

 

Thank you for your kind words - I appreciate them!

 

 

No problem. I know what you mean. But I would like XP to shine on it's own. And it does better and better...

 

I think XP is amazing - I am still STUNNED by the much better nightime experience. My only real knock is the overall night scenery is too dark in XP. I wish that Austin would include a 'brightness/contrast' slider in settings to allow us to ramp up the night view. It's nearly impossible to see the plane in certain external night views, unless you are close to a brightly lit airport or very near the ground.

 

x plane is not the king of smoothest even in 64 bits, i know all people here have GTX680 and GTX690 so they aren't aware, but with my GTX660 i can drop to 24-25 fps in high density areas withouth HDR

and if i max everything i even get CTD at KJFK.

 

I don't disagree that you can cripple X-Plane - if you max it and don't have max hardware - I get that. OTOH, and this is KEY, all the settings for X-Plane in terms of performance are in ONE SINGLE PLACE. This beats the pants out of FSX, where you have FSX settings, plus settings for all the scenery and many of the add ons which ALSO affect performance! (UTX), UT2, ORBX PNW, etc.

 

In FSX, you have to crawl all over your settings in many different places, make one change in UTX (example NIGHT LIGHTING) and then you can wind up with horrid frames.

 

XP allows 1-stop tweaking and is 'built in'. That is MUCH simpler. Also, XP has a way you can get real-time performance (frames and more) on your screen... that is VERY handy to see what you are actually achieving, and you can make adjustments accordingly and prevent a great number of problems.

 

That's because FSX is CPU bound and mostly ignores the GPU. It's all because ACES wrongly predicted that processor speeds would continue to exponentially increase. They never saw the multicore CPU/powerful GPU combo coming until they were too far into development to make any drastic changes to the code, and so you have a 7-year old flight simulator that can chug even on today's top of the line hardware.

 

My advice: once you're done tweaking settings to your satisfaction, turn off the FPS indicator and just fly. You'll never even notice when framerates drop into the 20s.

 

Yes, this is well-known. Let's not forget also that FSX is forever stuck in 32-bit mode and will NEVER be able to use high-end equipment to the fullest, as opposed to XP. That alone killed my love of FSX.

 

I love how well XP10 works with my specs, but I definitely want to see continuius improvementm such as:

- Terminal buildings

- Real world moon phase

- Seasonal textures

- Turn AI on/off

 

I look forward to future updates

 

All of these wishes are things many of us want to have... but I'm more than happy letting Austin Meyer take us wherever he wants to with XP. He's one smart dude!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your kind words - I appreciate them!

 

 

 

 

I think XP is amazing - I am still STUNNED by the much better nightime experience. My only real knock is the overall night scenery is too dark in XP. I wish that Austin would include a 'brightness/contrast' slider in settings to allow us to ramp up the night view. It's nearly impossible to see the plane in certain external night views, unless you are close to a brightly lit airport or very near the ground.

 

 

 

I don't disagree that you can cripple X-Plane - if you max it and don't have max hardware - I get that. OTOH, and this is KEY, all the settings for X-Plane in terms of performance are in ONE SINGLE PLACE. This beats the pants out of FSX, where you have FSX settings, plus settings for all the scenery and many of the add ons which ALSO affect performance! (UTX), UT2, ORBX PNW, etc.

 

In FSX, you have to crawl all over your settings in many different places, make one change in UTX (example NIGHT LIGHTING) and then you can wind up with horrid frames.

 

XP allows 1-stop tweaking and is 'built in'. That is MUCH simpler. Also, XP has a way you can get real-time performance (frames and more) on your screen... that is VERY handy to see what you are actually achieving, and you can make adjustments accordingly and prevent a great number of problems.

 

 

 

Yes, this is well-known. Let's not forget also that FSX is forever stuck in 32-bit mode and will NEVER be able to use high-end equipment to the fullest, as opposed to XP. That alone killed my love of FSX.

 

 

 

All of these wishes are things many of us want to have... but I'm more than happy letting Austin Meyer take us wherever he wants to with XP. He's one smart dude!

 

Robert I agree, I spent a lot of money on FSX myself and now I am in love with X-plane 10. I don't have as good hardware as you ( 2500k@ 4.5 GTX670 4GB 8 gigs of ram) but XP10 uses my hardware much better than FSX does and I get way better performance in XP10..

 

 

I have not bought the 777 yet because of a dispute I have had with the .org but after reading your comments I might put that behind me and just buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XP allows 1-stop tweaking and is 'built in'. That is MUCH simpler.

 

Is that a function native to the simulator, or simply the lack of addins such as Orbx, weather, scenery, AI traffic, weather, environment, and others to work with? In many ways, X-Plane is "simpler" because there's very few supporting addons out there to try and mesh together. Blessing? Curse? That's up to the end user.

 

Personally, I've found my X-Plane tweaking to be on par with MSFS - perhaps a little more involved, actually... primarily because of my lack of X-Plane configuration experience. I'd expect it to end up about the same - once I figure out how I want XP set up, if I ever need a reinstall, it'd be a very quick exercise to get it all in place... just as configuring FSX is for me today.

 

-Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert I agree, I spent a lot of money on FSX myself and now I am in love with X-plane 10. I don't have as good hardware as you ( 2500k@ 4.5 GTX670 4GB 8 gigs of ram) but XP10 uses my hardware much better than FSX does and I get way better performance in XP10..

 

 

I have not bought the 777 yet because of a dispute I have had with the .org but after reading your comments I might put that behind me and just buy it.

 

The Ramzzess 777 is a game-changer. It will take you a little getting used-to if you're used to PMDG 737NGX - some procedures are different, and the MCP is different too, but the more you fly it, the more fun it is! It's a heavy- which feels a lot different from the NGX.

 

I put some custom recorded sounds up on X-Plane.org forum which you might want to substitute for the default PA Announcements that ship with the airplane. You just copy them to the aircraft sounds folder, the PA subdirectory, and overwrite the files that are there by default. Here's the link if you want to preview/download the PA announcements I made.

 

If you want to really go up the ladder of realism, I highly recommend PilotEdge realtime online ATC. It's free for 2 weeks, then they have various subscription plans. Many with no committment period. I signed up for unlimited annual use which averages 50 cents a day. They are online 7 days a week from 8am to 11pm Pacific Time. I love that. No more wishing and hoping that VATSIM or IVAO are online and unlike VATSIM/IVAO, the controllers at PilotEdge don't suddenly decide to close up shop without warning...which is a total bummer.

 

Right now Pilot Edge is limited to Southern california area ops, but they are in talks to open another operations hub on the EAST coast, allowing for cross-country flights. How good are they? They are professionals. And you don't experience the volume spikes that are common on VATSIM. The cleanest sound I've ever heard, they take you across all the frequencies... clearance, ground, tower, departure, center, approach, tower, ground... you'll be quite busy on the radio, I can tell you!

 

Also, there is a 64-bit plug in to make most Saitek gear work in XP 10. I think it's called XSaitekPanels.

 

Hints to get up and running with the Ramzzess 777:

 

There is a main-menu panel which is in the upper right corner of XPlane after you install the aircraft. Open the flyout by clicking on it. There is a hidden icon of the airplane, click on the MENU tab to open the fly out menu:

 

 

x8hi985z42r9wx145q9r.jpg

 

Then you will see the main menu for the 777. This is the hub of loading the plane for fuel - do NOT use the FUEL loader in XP10!

 

To load fuel, the plane's doors must be OPEN (you need to CLICK on them but may not be able to see them if the Quick Start text is showing like below:

 

r1z7nej70vh9j6nyjatp.jpg

 

Click the BLUE ICON on the 777 main menu to reveal the hidden airplane diagram. YOU MUST use the airplane diagram to open the doors, or else know the keyboard commands (I think it's Shift F1 and Shift F2 but I'm not sure I remember) those key commands are covered in the 777 Tutorial that ships with the plane. Here's the MAIN MENU with the doors unhidden:

 

ufuizaivi5nfsod4g5x3.jpg

 

Where the doors are highlighted in yellow, mouse click on top of the door squares (there are TWO). These are the only 2 doors that are needed to load fuel and passengers/cargo to the plane!

 

UNCHECK the custom failures, real limits and real time options, at least till you get familiar with the plane. Go to a site like FuelPlanner.com. Join up for the free trial membership so you can get the fuel loadsheets in KG instead of imperial pounds! Or you can spend time using a conversion factor, not worth the pain! Select the B777-200 aircraft from the drop down menu, then Enter the departure and destination ICAO airport codes into fuel planner and click LOADSHEET. You'll get a nice printout with all the data you will need to enter into the fuel boxes in the main menu as shown in the diagram above.

 

If you now click SAVE STGS (Save Settings), then ALL the data you have in your MENU will be available next time you start this plane, including your FUEL LOAD data. When the plane restarts for your next XP session, simply click LOAD STGS (Load Settings) and your previously saved data will come back, and the boxes you wanted tick marked will be ticked and the ones you don't won't! Cake!

 

Of course I had to have help finding all of this, because I couldn't find the AIRPLANE DIAGRAM (I didn't know you had to click the BLUE ICON in the upper right corner of the 777 menu!) The QUICK ZOOM will put a white magnifying glass on the left side of your X-Plane screen. Click the magnifying glass to see a layout of all the airplane's 3D panels. This helps you get around quickly as you are going through the pre-flight setup. Watch the tutorial video they include - it's a lifesaver! I watched the video, and within a short time, I was starting the airplane from cold and dark and pushing back, taxing,

and flying.

 

NUANCES: The APU on this plane will quit running after 10 minutes. If this happens you cannot start the plane, as no GROUND AIR CART is offered. There is another issue in extremely cold weather where you can freeze to death while programming the plane to start it up. So, at first, fly in warm climates or push the weather to a warm temp to remove that issue. Do all the setup while connected to ground power. After you're gassed and you've programmed the FMC, you can enable the Fuel pumps and Hydraulics and start the APU. Don't start the engines at the gate, because the PUSHBACK truck only works if engines are not running. After pushback (you uncheck the tickbox for pushback) you can start the engines, then switch off the APU.

 

 

So I wrote all of this to help you and other new 777 owners avoid some of the pain.

 

Also, it's best to always start with the 777 cold and dark. If you're flying online you should start at a GATE or RAMP, not on the runway (ATC won't like it if you start of the runway).

 

Cheers!

 

Is that a function native to the simulator, or simply the lack of addins such as Orbx, weather, scenery, AI traffic, weather, environment, and others to work with? In many ways, X-Plane is "simpler" because there's very few supporting addons out there to try and mesh together. Blessing? Curse? That's up to the end user.

 

Personally, I've found my X-Plane tweaking to be on par with MSFS - perhaps a little more involved, actually... primarily because of my lack of X-Plane configuration experience. I'd expect it to end up about the same - once I figure out how I want XP set up, if I ever need a reinstall, it'd be a very quick exercise to get it all in place... just as configuring FSX is for me today.

 

-Greg

 

Greg is correct, there is a DEFINITE learning curve as you configure your flight surface controllers for X-Plane. Honestly, the add-ons I've purchased, plus the ones I got free, generally don't require a lot of tweaking. Now the custom airplanes (Ramzzess B777) is a learning curve, but no more painful than the pain I experienced learning the PMDG 737NGX. It's just I got "used" to flying the NGX. At first, it was a nightmare. Any new complex airplane is going to have a learning curve, believe it.

 

I will say that a total reinstall of X-Plane is far less frightful to me than the same deal in FSX.

 

My .02 YMMV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive seen a video that ported over FSX sceneries to XPX. Does this mean that a good number of add ons for FSX can be ported over? This would make it easier to cope with all the addons expense that has been invested.

 

Also has anyone used TrackIr 5 with XPX?

 

What I would like to see is major developers start fully supporting XPX. However the way I see it, we are on the cusp of going two ways. P3D V2.0 or XPX Ver x.xx and they are all seeing what is going to happen before investing dollars in the platform of choice. I think most are hoping somehow someway P3d becomes viable since its a MSFS base and all their work is based on FSX, therefore would be easier to port to P3D. Just look at all the native installers for P3D.

 

That being said, if LM decides to cut off all these devs then it appears there will be a mass following to XPX.

There doesnt seem to be a full real time weather injection as well as proper AI traffic. And ATC seems to be lacking, nor has any developers been contributing that way. But this is definitly something to watch, maybe even play with from time to time when FSX doesnt play nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However the way I see it, we are on the cusp of going two ways. P3D V2.0 or XPX Ver x.xx and they are all seeing what is going to happen before investing dollars in the platform of choice.

 

It all depends on whether P3D V2.0 will be 32 or 64 bits. If it remains 32 bits, it will have no future in the entertainment mass market (i.e. us).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends on whether P3D V2.0 will be 32 or 64 bits. If it remains 32 bits, it will have no future in the entertainment mass market (i.e. us).

 

LM has already indicated the LONG term goal is 64bit. Devs all know that. I believe they are all waiting to see how all this licensing mess works out. Right now its extremely foggy, especially with the fact LM keeps encouraging FSX addon devs to support it. However if there cant be any future distinction, of corporate and consumer licence, I would expect to see a mass jump to x-plane. On the one hand LM doesnt want to lose all these addons as it only enhances any P3D product, but the corporate image they insist on, butts heads with that.

 

XPX keeps improving and its nice to see it is 64bit. More dev support and fix some bugs and issues that make it better than FSX, and there will have to be serious consideration to make the jump... I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LM has already indicated the LONG term goal is 64bit.

 

That sounds more like internet conjecture taken as fact. Lockheed Martin has not said anything official at this point, and until they do ... by this I mean LM and not one of their cheer leaders like the Orbx guy. Then it is best not to expect it to happen.

 

Instead it's probably best to look at the current situation of both sims instead of trying to predict a future that might not happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites