I'm currently having niggling problems with my trim wheel, and I find I keep going to a default set up, where I know the plane flies true, the airport is sound .... I use a Carenado Piper PA-28 at EGNJ Humberside airport.

 

I've used the same plane at the same airport for any calibration checks. Over and over again.

 

I wondered if anyone else had a 'test set-up' ....?

Well, I never had a test setup for hardware issues. But I used to use KEWR, the NGX, and flying over NYC in FSX to test FPS at different settings. With my new computer this is pretty much a thing of the past. Though I did use Flytampa ST Maarteen for a few test too.

I always use default aircraft, C172 or B737 for testing any hardware first.

There used to be a cool thing called the Petraeus Index. I did all my fps tests at KEDW. Anyway basically the stock C172 VC gets a score of 100. I note the avg fps over a 2 min time period, then use that as the score of a 100. Of course most settings turned to 0.

 

It was kinda interesting to see the various payware planes score a percentage against the c172.

 

You could really tell the fps hogs. I haven't run any tests in a long time though.

I daren't run a FPS test, but I know I shouldn't worry, everything runs smoothly.

 

I tried to 'lock' my test setup as the default starting place/plane using the default option in the Flight section, but it never worked. Not sure why, I followed the instructions in the Learning Centre.

I use KEWR runway 11.

The reason why is that it has some of everything.

 

There is a road right behind it (It's the ramp to either 78)

There is a little lake to the right of the aircraft, directly on climb out is more water and eventually the Hudson River

The shipping yards of Port Newark (including those crane thingies they based the AT-ATs from Star Wars off of. They are supposed to be poorly optimized in FSX)

Heavy AI on the ground and in the Air.

I know the roads in the area.

 

With this scenario I can test road traffic and the new Vector addon I bought from Orbx.

I can test anything to do with water.

Can check how much AI I need and if their lights are working.

 

I benchmark the FPS I get with the NGX in this scenario and place other addon planes in the same situation.

 

I think I have a pretty decent system, but the area (using ORBX's VECTOR suggestions) brings FSX FPS to it's knees with 777. I'd love to have this area at a rock solid 25 FPS or something similar.

 

So.. all of that to say, "Yes, I have a benchmark scenario"

I don't own enough hardware to do serious testing, but I always test the performance of new aircraft at Mataveri (SCIP.) That is for two simple reasons: First of all, the performance is not influenced by stuff like complex scenery or lots of AI - the airports is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, surrounded by nothing but water for hundreds of miles. Secondly, loading times are minimal there (for the same obvious reasons as before). This gives me the opportuninty to select the aircraft and start flying more or less immediately.

Also, in the rare case that something does not run as expected, it is easier to figure it out there than anywhere else due to the short loading times.