All in all I don't find the Legacy to be much heavier on the system then default planes. If heavier at all.

 

It's statements like that one that will eventually encourage me to upgrade my pc... :( While I can't comment on the NGX (sorry, I know that's the purpose of this thread), I do find that the Legacy gives me about a 25% - 40% fps hit compared to default planes, or real lightweights like the older Carenado offerings.

It's statements like that one that will eventually encourage me to upgrade my pc... :( While I can't comment on the NGX (sorry, I know that's the purpose of this thread), I do find that the Legacy gives me about a 25% - 40% fps hit compared to default planes, or real lightweights like the older Carenado offerings.

 

Maybe it's too long ago that I've flown a default plane and I've gotten used to the Legacy so much that it is default to me... if that makes any sense. ^_^

Maybe it's too long ago that I've flown a default plane and I've gotten used to the Legacy so much that it is default to me... if that makes any sense.

 

Makes sense to me! I also have a tendency for locking my frames way too high (60) so as to see exactly how much a certain plane or scenery has in terms of fps hit on my pc... If i locked at 24 or 30, I might not notice so much! But man.. when you do get 60 fps while flying, it's soooo addictive...

Legacy gives me about a 25% - 40% fps hit compared to default planes, or real lightweights like the older Carenado offerings.

 

And I see you have the same CPU as me so I should pay attention here

 

Makes sense to me! I also have a tendency for locking my frames way too high (60) so as to see exactly how much a certain plane or scenery has in terms of fps hit on my pc... If i locked at 24 or 30, I might not notice so much! But man.. when you do get 60 fps while flying, it's soooo addictive...

 

60 fps with that CPU ? How much have you turned down the sliders ?

60 fps with that CPU ? How much have you turned down the sliders ?

 

60 fps depends on the plane and where I'm flying. For example, Carenado's C-185 in say, Orbx NRM or PFJ, I get 60 fps no problem. This is with most sliders most of the way turned up, autogen on dense.

 

Anything complex in planes or scenery, and I most definitely do not get 60 fps... for example, in the same type of remote scenic flying, the Legacy I get around 35 - 45 fps. Dense cloud cover comes with another (albeit reasonable) hit. Dense urban landscape, another hit, though this largely depends on where, some urban centers are far more friendly than others. And with FSX, I forget all about using any AI...

 

I notice that with my system, performance scales downwards rapidly, far more rapidly than most people's FS specific systems. When things run good, it's great, but it cannot handle load at all - I might get the same 60 fps on light scenery that someone's good system gets, but where a load (plane, scenery) might only take a good system down 5 or 10 fps, it takes mine down 20 or 30 fps...

Makes sense to me! I also have a tendency for locking my frames way too high (60) so as to see exactly how much a certain plane or scenery has in terms of fps hit on my pc... If i locked at 24 or 30, I might not notice so much! But man.. when you do get 60 fps while flying, it's soooo addictive...

 

Try locking at 30 fps and use the nvidia inspector "1/2 monitor refresh rate" setting for Vsync - it produces a very smooth flight!

Try locking at 30 fps and use the nvidia inspector "1/2 monitor refresh rate" setting for Vsync - it produces a very smooth flight!

 

Ahh... not for me on my AMD card!

Ahh... not for me on my AMD card!

 

Ooops! No.. :blush:

60 fps depends on the plane and where I'm flying. For example, Carenado's C-185 in say, Orbx NRM or PFJ, I get 60 fps no problem. This is with most sliders most of the way turned up, autogen on dense.

 

Anything complex in planes or scenery, and I most definitely do not get 60 fps... for example, in the same type of remote scenic flying, the Legacy I get around 35 - 45 fps. Dense cloud cover comes with another (albeit reasonable) hit.

 

I also use autogen on dense in ORBX scenery and other sliders high. AI traffic sliders very low. Many clouds in the sky appear to kill fps the most. Also closeness the big cities and some planes like 737NGX leads to hard hit. Might add I use the DX 10 tweaks.

Many clouds in the sky appear to kill fps the most.

 

My video card (AMD) is different from yours, so my cloud performance probably has no bearing to yours either.

 

Also closeness the big cities and some planes like 737NGX leads to hard hit.

 

And your cpu is overclocked.. mine is just stock! I can't fly in / near big cities at all without turning slliders way down. This is one reason why I don't own the NGX. I wouldn't be able to fly anywhere a person would typically fly it!

And since the Legacy is a IFR tourer cloudy weather is a clear wish.

 

At the risk of going off on too much of a tangent here - I wouldn't really characterize the Legacy as an IFR tourer. IRL, equipped as RealAir has modeled it, it's certainly IFR capable, but it's not a plane in which I'd want to spend too much time IMC, and I'd cancel or modify trips that I'd go ahead with in other aircraft a bit more appropriate for IMC flight.

 

None of which is to imply in any way that this isn't a great FSX model or that you can't fly it IFR in FSX if you want to.

 

Scott

Why not? I'd fly it in IMC. I mean, I wouldn't fly it here in Duluth in IMC... bound to be icing

 

But the rest of the world where it's warm, sure!

 

So, what plane would you label as an IFR tourer? A boring Skylane? Perhaps you're thinking IFR tourer to mean an IFR training platform. Then I'd definitely agree. The Legacy is more of an enroute performer...

So, what plane would you label as an IFR tourer? A boring Skylane? Perhaps you're thinking IFR tourer to mean an IFR training platform.

 

No, I'm not thinking about training, though of course I agree that a 182 would be better in that role. I certainly didn't say anything about a 182, which I also wouldn't characterize as an IFR tourer.

 

To my mind, to characterize something as an IFR tourer requires, in addition to reasonable speed and range, good stability, high altitude capability (but keep in mind I do live in the west where MEA's are in oxygen territory to start - these are my real world biases) and some ability to deal with ice. I've seen the effects of ice, even in mid-summer, when flying IMC and I shudder to think of flying the Legacy with even a small load. The Legacy's inherent slippery nature also makes it a less than ideal IFR platform for most owner/pilots IRL, where real-world currency (as opposed to required minimums) is always hard to maintain.

 

Scott

So you're thinking Baron? A lot more pricey to operate and slower. But it can carry more useful load for sure.

 

Other than that you can go Cirrus, Lancair I-VP, Columbia (Cessna whatever), then you're pretty much into turboprop territory. Though I hear the "jet prop" is highly efficient.

 

You should meet Keith Smith, owner of Pilot Edge. He flies a Lancair 360 commonly files IFR. Now if FSX could just get a 360!

The Legacy is probably my favorite GA aircraft for FSX - with the RXP 430/530 it's awesome for just about any kind of GA flying.