In other words "Love it or Leave it"  :Big Grin:

I can make a stock or Justflight plane OOM in N.Y. or London airspace, at Aerosoft Dublin X and AS Thessaloniki X - now are you willing to reconsider, anonymous?   :P

To me, this is a _Flight_ simulation. As long as the flight part - that is the aircraft, the flight model - is on PMDG level within FSX, I don't really care about how realistic the surroundings look.

 

If I would ever encounter an OOM or VAS issue, I would happily get rid of some scenery detail in favor of finishing a 15-hour flight with a truly magnificent and sophisticated _airplane_ in _flightsim_.

 

If I would not be happy with that, I would start nagging scenery developers that their scenery prevents me from flying the way I want. In the end, scenery is what eats up your VAS on the long run, not the airplane, right?

I rest my case, lets record what's been said here , and by whom,. Then wait till PMDG SP1 comes out with new features and see what effect this has on VAS footprint.

 

I totally accept that PMDG products are no longer for me cause that baby is getting too big for the bath, and doesn't seem to realise it.

 

Does not need to have low memory footprint of default aircraft, at same time should keep its memory requirement within a boundary that makes the sim as a whole stable. 

 

Google search shows many PMDG customers  are in same boat as me, buying a product for FSX that's too big to fit inside the simulator it runs on, and only promising to get bigger still. That ladies and gentlemen is where I make my PMDG exit. 

 

With  low scenery settings ,only about 10% of my pmdg 777 flights ever made it to destination before a VAS crash, that's where loving it  turned to, as suggested leaving it for me.

 

google is your friend when after public opinion on an issue ,

 

google,  "PMDG 777 OOM", the search results is not a pmdg advert trust me.

 

As a result I conclude that opinions here are in the minority. Argue with google results if you prefer but am out of this lala land.

 

Lets see what SP1 VAS brings with the advertised new features. I will check on google.

The fact that people are getting errors now when they didn't in the past isn't surprising. We didn't have the huge amount of scenery add-ons back when the 744 was out. If anything, people had basic mesh, a couple add-on airports, and modest graphics settings - most cards/processors couldn't handle much higher back then. Now, people are maxing sliders thinking "I'll be fine," on top of all of their memory-heavy scenery and aircraft.

 

Again: it's not just the aircraft - it's your sim too. If you're going to blame the 777, you can blame your add-on scenery, too.

 

 

 

Precisely.

 

The answer is simple. If you get lots of OOM's, and you want to run the PMDG T7... then dial some sliders back, and don't be so greedy with hyper detailed add-on scenery.

 

More, more, more. you kids want it all.

With low scenery settings ,only about 10% of my pmdg 777 flights ever made it to destination before a VAS crash, that's where loving it turned to, as suggested leaving it for me.

 

If your getting ooms  with low settings  than there is some thing else  is  causing the issue other  than  the t7

 

If you want  to continue  to post in this thread I suggest  to sign your name as per the forum rules other wise you might  find your posts will get deleted.

I still don't get this, he is saying that most of his flights end in crashes, yet the majority of the rest of us have few if any issues. Ahhh..... I give up.

I think the whole VAS debate about who is at fault (user/sim/aircraft/scenery/Santa Claus) is rather off topic.

The OP and others (including me) were only asking *if* there was any difference in performance & VAS use with the SP1/300ER compared to RTM/200LR. Nothink more: no blame, no debate, etc.

Personally, I never suffer from OOM's because I use realistic settings with a good balance of addons. 
 

My rule of thumb is:

 

Graphics settings (incl. AI traffic settings) for fps and SceneryConfigEditor for VAS. (Managing fps comes first, as higher fps by and large will lower your VAS footprint anyway.)

 

 

google is your friend when after public opinion on an issue ,
 
google,  "PMDG 777 OOM", the search results is not a pmdg advert trust me.
 
As a result I conclude that opinions here are in the minority. Argue with google results if you prefer but am out of this lala land.

 

That's like arguing a wikipedia article is a good source for a grad school dissertation.  The frequency, or total amount of searches doesn't mean that it's actually a problem.  That's like trying to say the number of people googling the cost of a Ferrari is proof that a Ferrari is too expensive.  Sure, the frequency and total amount of searches points to it being an issue, but it does not mean that it is a problem of the developer.  Any developer who creates products that are hugely detailed is going to be pushing up against VAS limits.  For what it's worth, orbx sceneries have about 3 times the amount of hits on google for OOM issues, yet PMDG is the one taking all the heat in the community?

 

See?

 

There's the curiosity.

 

It's not the facts that people latch on to; it's the emotion, and often the coincidence.  Despite aircraft being frame killers and some being heavy VAS users in the past, most didn't brush up against limits because there was nothing else competing for VAS.  Scenery has also been a huge consumer of VAS.  Up until now, they may have competed, but neither was so large that it pushed things over the limit.  Now, though, the aircraft consuming more in an effort to simulate more, and sceneries are consuming more in an effort to be more detailed.  The competition used to be harmless, and now it's causing an issue.  It's not that the 777 is the cause of OOMs; it's that it's a larger factor along with everything else.  I'd argue that if it happened the other way around (777 first, then many of the other heavy hitters, like orbx scenery), people would be over there banging down doors instead of over here. 

 

I think a refresher on basic statistics, in addition to memory management is in order.

 

I love misapplication of statistics.  It makes me smile.

 

100% of people exposed to water will die:

 

 

100% of people exposed to water will die:

 

Haha, that reminds me of this:

 

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

+1 Kyle's FACTS ABOUT WATER!  Hysterical!

Zoom Air is just a fellow that can't be reasoned with. No point in anyone trying to explain anything to him. If he doesn't want to tune his settings to lower his VAS footprint there's nothing that can be done for this guy.

 

Jim Burke

Kyle's Water facts are both timely and perfect! 

Reminds me of something I heard years ago in a discussion about logic and deductive reasoning...

      Money is the root of all evil
     Time is money
     Time is the root of all evil

 

 

Reminds me of something I heard years ago in a discussion about logic and deductive reasoning...

 

haha - and this reminds me of the logic about women:

 

Women require time and money:

Women = Time x Money

 

"Time is money:"

Time = Money

 

Therefore:

Women = Money x Money = Money^2

 

Money is the root of all evil:

Money = sqrt(Evil)

 

Therefore:

Women = (sqrt(Evil))^2   =>   Women = Evil