Ok then I was right sadly... My settings aren't that high, it's mainly the scenery and the resolution of 5980*1080 that I'm afraid my sim won't cope with once I throw Concorde X at it.
I guess I'm finally out then.
 
Thanks for the clarification Ray.

HI Max I have the same resolution as you do with three Monitors running Nvidia Surround

this won't work with Prepar3d Concord?

 

Do you have ConcordeX Christopher? Just curious.

 

That kind of systems management is way beyond my talents, Ray. I have always dreamed of being able to do it, but I enjoy looking at nice scenery too much :smile:

That kind of systems management is way beyond my talents, Ray. I have always dreamed of being able to do it, but I enjoy looking at nice scenery too much :smile:

 

Christopher,

 

The autopilot panel may look daunting but no more so than that of a 777. Just different ways of controlling speed, climb and descent. There are more systems to set and monitor but if you leave the VFE active your workload is much reduced.

 

Having met you you're younger than me I believe. Think of it as a way of keeping the grey matter ticking over nicely. :wink:

That kind of systems management is way beyond my talents, Ray. I have always dreamed of being able to do it, but I enjoy looking at nice scenery too much :smile:

 

You still get to see nice scenery....it just goes past you really fast.

You still get to see nice scenery....it just goes past you really fast.

 

Boeing and Airbus pilots can simulate flying Concorde by increasing simulation rate by x2. That will give you Mach 1.7 or thereabouts. Concorde still goes around 200kts faster but you get the idea!

Just had a peep there on Youtube on a Cold and Dark Tutorial for the Concorde 

 

Yep,  i'm with Christopher on this one   :Big Grin:    Looks very good though 

 

 

 

You

 

Just Clicked in your Youtub Channel there Mark, wow you know your stuff, very good.

 

Impressive Tutorial

 

I was just going to report that FSX-SE has similar memory spikes as P3D when re-sizing windows and stretching=1. In fact the panel disappears on stretching (A321) and becomes unusable. So I believe its the same for both and must be very old flawed logic shared by both.

 

With stretching=0 there are no more spikes.

 

You might be trying with 1080p which does not show OOMs anyway. The problem manifests with high res monitors.

Ok, did some more testing of this today and have some more info to report.

 

In my tests yesterday that I posted, I was starting both scenarios in a 1920x1080 sized window.  Today, I loaded the same Concorde-X situation in a full screen (no stretching =0 in cfg) 3440x1440 window and VAS was immediately similar to the "stretched=1" setting, and the 2D panels were obnoxiously big and already "stretched" if that makes sense.

 

So, the key to saving the VAS using the panel stretch =0 trick is to initially load the sim in a 1920x1080 window, and then once your preferred Concorde-X situation or flight is loaded and started, resize the window to whatever you like.  When doing it this way, I can run the sim at 3440x1440 with essentially the same VAS usage as 1920x1080 because the memory hungry 2D panels are still the 1920x1080 size if that makes sense.

 

As a bonus, they actually look much better at the 1920x1080 non-stretched size even while running the sim at 3440x1440.

 

Still a fantastic discovery by Duke, just make sure you load the flight initially in a window around the recommended 1920x1080 size then size up window to larger with minimal VAS increase that I can tell up to 3440x1440.  Higher might be fine too, but that's my monitor size.

Ok, did some more testing of this today and have some more info to report.

 

In my tests yesterday that I posted, I was starting both scenarios in a 1920x1080 sized window. Today, I loaded the same Concorde-X situation in a full screen (no stretching =0 in cfg) 3440x1440 window and VAS was immediately similar to the "stretched=1" setting, and the 2D panels were obnoxiously big and already "stretched" if that makes sense.

 

So, the key to saving the VAS using the panel stretch =0 trick is to initially load the sim in a 1920x1080 window, and then once your preferred Concorde-X situation or flight is loaded and started, resize the window to whatever you like. When doing it this way, I can run the sim at 3440x1440 with essentially the same VAS usage as 1920x1080 because the memory hungry 2D panels are still the 1920x1080 size if that makes sense.

 

As a bonus, they actually look much better at the 1920x1080 non-stretched size even while running the sim at 3440x1440.

 

Still a fantastic discovery by Duke, just make sure you load the flight initially in a window around the recommended 1920x1080 size then size up window to larger with minimal VAS increase that I can tell up to 3440x1440. Higher might be fine too, but that's my monitor size.

Interesting. Can you try with a new scenario from scenario screen instead of saved one? I recall seeing panels remembering their states in saves.

Just had a peep there on Youtube on a Cold and Dark Tutorial for the Concorde 

 

Yep,  i'm with Christopher on this one   :Big Grin:    Looks very good though 

 

 

 

 

Just Clicked in your Youtub Channel there Mark, wow you know your stuff, very good.

 

Impressive Tutorial

 

 

Glad you liked it.

Interesting. Can you try with a new scenario from scenario screen instead of saved one? I recall seeing panels remembering their states in saves.

Yes, I just ran four scenarios again to confirm my last post, this time doing a new scenario from the initial scenario screen each time, loaded the Concord at Fly Tampa St Maarten's gorgeous Princess Juliana, weather clear. 

 

Using default panel stretching the default =1, it would load 3440x1440 with ~1.19GB VAS, then after running through some checklists, intentionally loading 8 panels at a time several times, spinning camera around both in VC and exterior fully zoomed out etc, it dropped to ~.85GB VAS.  This was the same whether starting in a 1920x1080 window and then resizing to 3440x1440 or simply starting at 3440x1440.  The 2D panels in this mode were stretched larger when at 3440x1440, were functional, but simply too big.

 

Using the panel stretching off =0 setting, when I loaded at 3440x1440, I had the same results with VAS running as I did with panel stretching on, and the 2D panels were the same too stretched look.  VAS was down to the same ~.85GB after the same spamming panels etc as mentioned above.

 

Using the panel stretching off =0 setting, but loading in a 1920x1080 window and then resizing the window to 3440x1440, I still had ~1.56GB VAS free.  Additonally, the 2D panels, even after resizing the screen, stayed at the initial 1920x1080 size and looked much better.  After doing the same spamming of panels, cameras etc, I had only dropped down to ~1.4GB VAS.

 

So, the key is the 2D panels, when panel stretching is disabled, stay the same size as the initial loading of the scenario.  Once loaded in a 1920x1080 window, I can resize to 3440x1440, keep the great VAS savings of the smaller 2D panels, and the 2D panels look much better because they aren't stretched and skewed larger.

 

Whew, that was a lot of typing ha

 

 

on Youtube on a Cold and Dark Tutorial for the Concorde

Can you link it please, Elaine? Thanks.

 

 

Using the panel stretching off =0 setting, when I loaded at 3440x1440, I had the same results with VAS running as I did with panel stretching on, and the 2D panels were the same too stretched look. 

 

So looks like panel stretching is quite buggy.

 

I think the approach of loading small screen first is fine, I usually load in a window so that while loading process is on I can do other things, and go full screen when done.

 

I think the approach of loading small screen first is fine, I usually load in a window so that while loading process is on I can do other things, and go full screen when done.

Yep, that's my thoughts as well and how I will operate moving forward.  Very pleased with the no stretch setting, as not only does it save VAS and keep the 2D panels looking correct, it totally eliminates the lag when resizing the P3D window.

 

Great find!

 

EDIT: Just a disclaimer to any reading, these were my results on my machine, and I unfortunately haven't had enough free time to try an actual 3+ hour flight to monitor results.  I don't expect any wonky problems, but your mileage may vary and do not purchase the Concorde-X based on my results alone.

 

 

EDIT: Just a disclaimer to any reading, these were my results on my machine, and I unfortunately haven't had enough free time to try an actual 3+ hour flight to monitor results.  I don't expect any wonky problems, but your mileage may vary and do not purchase the Concorde-X based on my results alone.

 

I would also wait for FSLabs to confirm that this is a solution and they will support this before buying.

 

 

I would also wait for FSLabs to confirm that this is a solution and they will support this before buying.

 

That is my thought also. I really want to purchase this aircraft but without a demo or refund policy I am not willing to risk the cash to try it. Nor do I want to give up my wide view to use it. Going back to a single 1980 x 1020 screen would be like removing the electric window actuators in my car and putting in cranks.

 

Ted