Hi Rob,

 

Could I ask you what control inputs you use as in joystick & throttles in particular?  I do know you use rudder pedals.  Every decent run-of-the-mill joystick I ever owned became jerky in time i.e. lacked smoothness. Despite playing with string tension, oils, grease etc. I am eyeing up the Hotas Warthog and Cougar flightsticks solely because they appears to be precision engineered. I'm talking x/y axes here. Buttons, hats etc are secondary. 

 

If anyone else reading this has a positive recommendation regarding controllers (worthy of  P3D v2.3!) I'd be delighted to know what you use and how you rate it.  

 

May I use this opportunity Rob to express my sincere thanks and appreciation for your significant contribution to our hobby, especially in championing P3D.  And your talent is exceeded only by your modesty!! 

 

KInd regards,

 

Gareth

 

PS Forum moderators should note I will pursue this line  of inquiry in the appropriate hardware forum :-) 

Rob, that was a great video! Thanks for sharing.

 

Quick question though... Do you mind sharing your P3D 2.3 settings with us? A screenshot of each settings window would be awesome.

 

Thanks in advance!

Wow Gareth, thank you for those very kind words.

 

My controllers/modules:

Saitek Cessna Pro Yoke

Saitek Cessna Pro Pedals

Saitek Trim Wheel

GoFlight TQ6 throttle quadrant

 

Modules:

Saitek Switch panel

GoFlight MCP Advanced

GoFlight P8 (X 2)

GoFlight RP48

GoFlight T8

GoFlight ATC

GoFlight 166A (X 2) - com, nav, adf, obs, xpdr

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

EDIT: I haven't fully programmed all my GoFlight gear to work with the various aircraft I fly ... for some reason I can't get FSUIPC to work with any of the Q400 buttons/switches ... not even the landing lights switch ... when I click the switch in the Q400 VC I see the value it sends when I'm monitor with the FSUIPC console but when I assign that to my GFButton it will trigger the event but nothing happens in the Q400.  Has me puzzled ... anyway that's a different topic ... may need to ask Majestic and/or Pete D. for this one.

 

 

Quick question though... Do you mind sharing your P3D 2.3 settings with us?

 

Sure: http://www.robainscough.com/P3D_V2.php -- they only difference is that I used Target Frames = "Unlimited" for this flight ... it will increase FPS but may have a side effect of some stutters/jitters.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Wow Gareth, thank you for those very kind words.

 

My controllers/modules:

Saitek Cessna Pro Yoke

Saitek Cessna Pro Pedals

Saitek Trim Wheel

GoFlight TQ6 throttle quadrant

 

Modules:

Saitek Switch panel

GoFlight MCP Advanced

GoFlight P8 (X 2)

GoFlight RP48

GoFlight T8

GoFlight ATC

GoFlight 166A (X 2) - com, nav, adf, obs, xpdr

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

EDIT: I haven't fully programmed all my GoFlight gear to work with the various aircraft I fly ... for some reason I can't get FSUIPC to work with any of the Q400 buttons/switches ... not even the landing lights switch ... when I click the switch in the Q400 VC I see the value it sends when I'm monitor with the FSUIPC console but when I assign that to my GFButton it will trigger the event but nothing happens in the Q400.  Has me puzzled ... anyway that's a different topic ... may need to ask Majestic and/or Pete D. for this one.

 

 

 

Sure: http://www.robainscough.com/P3D_V2.php -- they only difference is that I used Target Frames = "Unlimited" for this flight ... it will increase FPS but may have a side effect of some stutters/jitters.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Thank you, Rob!

Rob

 

Always enjoy your videos, but have never understood why you use such a low zoom factor? I have found that when using anything lower than 90% to 100%, the cockpit looks distorted. But more importantly distance, depth, height  (and thus the impression of speed) is exaggerated somewhat, especially with a zoom of 30%.

 

Try nailing some landings at the correct zoom factor and you may find it more realistic and closer to what a pilot actually "feels" with relation to distance, position and depth.

 

Certainly not a criticism, but I have often wondered why so many people use a zoom factor below the recommended 90% to 100%.

 

Cheers DB

 

 

Certainly not a criticism, but I have often wondered why so many people use a zoom factor below the recommended 90% to 100%.

 

Easy answer, more cockpit is visible ... and if one zooms in too much the distance will be a blurry mess.  I personally like 40% zoom in most aircraft and then if I'm using the TrackIR I'll just move my head more forward if I need to see more.  But I agree with your observations, reduced zoom and wide angle perspectives do tend to make things feel faster than they really are.

 

But if I used 90% or 100% zoom with TrackIR ... it just wouldn't work well and probably make me sick.    

 

However a 90%-100% zoom does increase FPS.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Awesome! I am loving the look and sound of P3D V2.3 so much that I am currently downloading it along with ASN and REX 4. Really looking forward to see the new changes, I have had P3D sitting on the shelf gathering dust for the past couple of months, its only now I've realized what I am missing. As soon as PMDG licensing is sorted out then FSX is being buried 6 feet under and P3D is my new sim! 

As soon as PMDG licensing is sorted out then FSX is being buried 6 feet under and P3D is my new sim!

 

Yeah I think a lot of folks are hoping this happens ... seems a little odd that it hasn't happened already considering PMDG is a known consumer of VAS and P3D is more VAS efficient now ... P3D and PMDG seems like a perfect match, but we wait and hope.  Last I heard was maybe end of the year, but nothing confirmed.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Yeah I think a lot of folks are hoping this happens ... seems a little odd that it hasn't happened already considering PMDG is a known consumer of VAS and P3D is more VAS efficient now ... P3D and PMDG seems like a perfect match, but we wait and hope.  Last I heard was maybe end of the year, but nothing confirmed.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Yes it is quite odd that it hasn't been agreed upon yet. I doubt they won't have a license, I guess with them being partners with Boeing makes it all more difficult I could be wrong though. I sure hope they get it at the end of this year, P3D is at the top of the mountain now, and if there is a 64 bit version of P3D sometime in the future, it will be all the merrier! 

 

 

Yes it is quite odd that it hasn't been agreed upon yet.

 

I have no idea of the politics behind the situation, I doubt LM are holding anything up as it wouldn't be in their best interest to do so.  So whatever is going on behind the scene (making an assumption there is something going on) lets hope it gets rectified.  There were rumors it might be expensive, but I've not seen any concrete numbers yet.  I honestly don't mind PMDG cashing in, so long as they deliver the goods and it's something more than just a modified installer

 

In the meantime, CS 777, CS L1011, QualityWings, Airbus X, iFly 737, Dash 8 Q400 is more than enough to keep me occupied ... and now sneek previews of Aerosofts Airbus 319 ... I'm gonna be plenty busy.

 

Cheers, Rob.

I use 70% as my zoom factor interior VC.  Seems to be a good balance between wide perspective and having the right sense of motion.  Exterior views are 100. 

I spent all night setting up P3D and updating it. WOW! I have never seen anything like it in a simulator, V2.3 is awesome! Its butter smooth and just looks incredible! 

Zounds!  this thread is in top gear ... 

 

Rob, thanks for the thorough reply to my query; once again you go 'the extra mile' for us. It's appreciated.

 

You inadvertently answered another question I was not yet sure how to put to the P3D forums. That was what 'respectable' jets can we use in P3D, albeit temporarily? I have read mixed reviews about a few you mentioned re. systems depth and flight model fidelity. Which kind of reminds us that PMDG by definition has become the de facto benchmark for serious a/c.  

 

I sense we will not need to wait too much longer. Why even today Israel and Hamas evidently reached a peace accord. So anything is possible ...?

 

On a personal note, I never believed I would enjoy the flightsim experience as I am today. I know that obviously goes for a whole lot of us. I salute the dedication and brilliance of the LM programmers. And the open dialogue we seem to have with them.  GPU-wise, at 72, I can't see myself going much further than the GTX 780 OC I splashed out on recently. Why, I almost promised myself never to look at any of your videos again lest I cave in and techno-lust kicks in again  ...     

 

Which brings me to a final thought ..... Having said that about the GPU I still spent 1/2 hr today looking into G-Sync versus Adaptive/Free-Sync monitor technology. Now there's something to get excited about. I think. At any rate I fully expect to see much discussion in the forums on this subject as we continue our quest for the ultimate in fluid flight.  

 

'Fluid flight' is of course achievable right now. A fast PC, P3d v2.3 ...  and a six-pack. 

 

Now I'm off to play 'Tweak Your Zoom Factor'. 

 

All the best, Gareth

 

 

Having said that about the GPU I still spent 1/2 hr today looking into G-Sync versus Adaptive/Free-Sync monitor technology.

 

The Asus monitor with G-sync is out but extremely difficult to find anyone that has them "in stock" ... you may want to want for the Asus 4K G-sync monitors that will come out later this year.  The reviews so far about G-Sync monitors seems positive ... not sure how well G-sync would work in multi-monitor situations if each monitor had it's own video card driving it (I would imagine that might be an issue since G-sync would allow frames to be display based on GPU trigger (and each GPU would be working a different render load for each monitor) ... which might make for some cross monitor synchronization issues.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Hi Rob,

 

I see your point. As for me I use a single 24" LG LED 60Hz 1960x1280 and can't see myself going multi-monitors any time soon. If anything I became more concerned that those of us already invested in nVidia GPUs were going to have to pay a lot more to upgrade to Adaptive Sync, compared to say AMD's G-sync, touted as a low-cost upgrade. But then, maybe I misunderstood.

 

I'm surprised that the power cost-saving aspect of adaptive sync technology hasn't already resulted in a range of stock monitors claiming Eco-Savings. etc as a differentiating marketing feature. I can still see it happening in a rush though inside 12 months if GPU vendors grasp the marketing potential of both the visual and the cost-saving benefits to our niche market.

 

But then again it could fizz, like the discovery of Ambiophonic Sound which blows stereo away but has relatively few adopters. I came to the conclusion that most of us must have cloth ears. Still, I have a tube-driven Ambio system here at home and kid myself that it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Now, if a chap like you could start to work on Nvidia ....    

 

Best,

Gareth