Advice needed on several P3D tools/utilities

[Michael Moe 494]

14 hours ago, Nyxx said:

FSUIPC

Only have it installed to link virtual airline software to sim.

Chaseplane

Chaseplane after years on ezdok chaseplane unlike ezdoc is constantly updated and worked on, A very easy to use UI. A support forum thats maned and it's easy to get support. The world moved on with P3D v4 so did the camera add on world.

PTA

If anyone over looks the value of PTA it's a huge mistake. This App transforms your sim to a different level from a flat lifeless sim to one with depth. VC lighting, landscape , clouds. All can be adjusted independently You can start with Matt preset and it's easy to learn and adjust to your liking. Yes it's a must have without question unless anyone likes flat lifeless landscapes and washed out lifeless VC with no depth.

VC lighting

ASP4

It really is the only weather engine to have. End of.

ASCA

Well this is a topic on its own really. I used it for a long time,still do. Now looks is a personal thing. To my taste ASCA is ugly even crude. So I used REX Soft clouds with ASCA and that imo was a great combo.  Envtex came out and many prefer there cloud textures over the stock ASCA ones. I bought Envtex and still imo thought REX Soft clouds looked the best. But......Envtex sky textures working within ASCA is a thing of beauty. You install there sky texture within ASCA and you get something like 65 skies textures that are now matched to where you are in the world and weather conditions. Envtex for this sky depiction with ASCA is worth the asking price.

REX SF 

Forget the weather engine, turn it off you have ASP4. After using ASCA default with soft clouds and envtex. SF from day one is a new level that i've never seen before. Its brings clouds that can look like one clouds not many clumped together to bring you clouds that can be 10's of thousands of feet tall. CB etc.  Screenshots don't come close to seeing it running in the sim.

Also I've found since using SF I can up ASP4 cloud levels to 10 and min cloud distance 140 nm and max to 170 nm. That is a sim changer when your a high flyer than the ugly 90 mile flying carpet.

The perfect combo imo

ASP4 for weather, ASCA+Envtex for only sky textures and SF for cloud structures and stunning textures.

+1 in my book along with PFPX and TOPCAT. Flightplanner and performance tool for jets like the NGX and also Online tracker Vatsim /IVAO along with other great options. 

 

PS. I have PTA but like the ENVSHADE solution 

Thanks Michael Moe 

Edited March 4, 2018 by Michael Moe

[Benjamin J 751]

Dear all, thanks for the insightful comments. In addition to useful information about the products I asked about, it turns out that there are some additional things that I didn't even realize existed! So here we go:

FSUIPC: Sounds like it will still be useful for me to have it. Prepar3D doesn't have its own implementation for assigning different controls to different aircraft? how do you guys handle this problem? or do you just somehow keep the same controls for every aircraft you fly?

PTA: Sounds like I will want to have this... I'm a huge sucker for pretty graphics! It's also not too expensive, so...

Chaseplane: So, the issue here would be is that this product is pretty expensive at 40$. EZDok I get the (cheaper) upgrade since I have v1. I'll do some more research and decide then. Thanks for putting this on my radar though!

ASP4: definite must-buy

EnvTex: Sounds like this is the "new" REX4. I'll have a look at how it compares to the textures included in REX4. I like that the sky textures are compatible with ASCA though. Are these indeed significantly better than ASCA's?

ASCA: Sounds like this may be worth the money. Having automatic changes of sky and cloud textures to go with the weather sounds pretty awesome!

Rex SF: I understand that this product enhances the cloud models, expanding greatly on the available repertoire of P3D. If I understand correctly, ASP4 injects current weather, then ASCA goes and changes the textures to go with the weather, and REX SF then comes in to swap the models used by more appropriate ones? Is that how I should understand the integration of these three programs? I realize that when I use REX SF, I have to disable the texture swap for clouds in ASCA, which it sounds like most people don't like much anyway.

PFPX: Thanks Michael for bringing this one up! I used to use FSBuild for flight planning, but I'm guessing that's completely obsolete now. PFPX seems well-liked overall. Are there any other flightplanning utilities out there that people recommend?

TOPCAT: thanks for brining that one up too, michael! To what extent would you all say this is a must? I've never sen myself as being so advanced that I would need a utility such as this, also because it seems most admins come with automatic calculation tools for CG and such. Is TOPCAT really required or is it just to enhance your sense of realism?

[antonvs 76]

Benjamin, in addition to your list I would not be without Little NavMap 

https://albar965.github.io/littlenavmap.html

If you haven’t seen this you won’t believe the number of features, professional finish and its freeware. 

[Sartanius 399]

16 hours ago, antonvs said:

Benjamin, in addition to your list I would not be without Little NavMap 

Yep, LNM is a clever utility.  I normally mimic real world flights, including the exact gates used for departure and arrival (whenever possible).  One of the LNM features I use frequently is to locate where the gate I plan to arrive at is located around the destination terminal. LNM shows a plan view of the airport and exposes the AFCAD gate locations and gate numbers.  It is easy to locate the gate I need, and then plot the taxi route from the arrival runway.  You can also use Airport Design Editor (ADE) for this, but I prefer LNM.

Have fun, Benjamin!

[Boomer 1,619]

On 3/2/2018 at 3:31 PM, Benjamin J said:

• Ezdok Camera Addon v2: Given how much I liked the first version, the 12$ upgrade seems like a no brainer, but what do you all think? How many people use this?

I use Track IR andso have never looked at this, but are there any IR users who use Ezdok as well and is it beneficial?

Also, what are the advisable PTA settings for P3dv3 and v4?

Edited March 8, 2018 by Boomer

[Benjamin J 751]

26 minutes ago, Boomer said:

I use Track IR andso have never looked at this, but are there any IR users who use Ezdok as well and is it beneficial?

Also, what are the advisable PTA settings for P3dv3 and v4?

RE TrackIR: I'm pretty sure I used TrackIR with EZDock just fine, though it's been a while since I've done it. I don't remember the procedure of setting it up as particularly easy though, but maybe this was changed for v2.

EDIT: Just went over the EZDok's webpage: http://www.flight1.com/products.asp?product=ezdokcam2

It lists TrackIR compatibility as a feature so I definitely used it, though I don't remember how I set it up at the time. I do remember it being a lot of fun to control the camera with my head motion and still seeing the effects of EZdock on that same camera. Somehow it linked my head to the simulation in a way that moving the camera with the mouse would have never done to the same extent... if that makes sense?

EDIT2: I just noticed something quite intriguing in EZDok2... Apparently it can make the fuselage of the aircraft shake too? So it's not just the camera, it also plays with the physics impacting the aircraft fuselage? See the videos here: http://ezdok-camera.com/ (you can to scroll down a little)

 

16 hours ago, antonvs said:

Benjamin, in addition to your list I would not be without Little NavMap 

https://albar965.github.io/littlenavmap.html

If you haven’t seen this you won’t believe the number of features, professional finish and its freeware. 

Ha! That looks awesome, actually. Thanks for bringing it up, and for your 2 cents Doug! How does it compare with PFPX? I would really only use it to plan quick IFR flights, I'm not particularly in need of very advanced options. Really, the main reason I used a flight planner like FSBuild was so that I could export the flight plan into various FMS formats, which it seems LNM does. Is LNM a good alternative of would you still recommend PFPX?

 

One more question about Chaseplane. I see a ton of people in love with this, but it seems to me that this has a lot to do with its abilities for recording videos and the various cameras you can setup. I doubt I'll make significant use of such functions though, and my main reason to have it would be for the in-cockpit camera effects. Does Chase plane do this particular function better than EZDock v2?

Edited March 8, 2018 by Benjamin J

[Sartanius 399]

1 hour ago, Benjamin J said:

One more question about Chaseplane. I see a ton of people in love with this, but it seems to me that this has a lot to do with its abilities for recording videos and the various cameras you can setup. I doubt I'll make significant use of such functions though, and my main reason to have it would be for the in-cockpit camera effects. Does Chase plane do this particular function better than EZDock v2?

Benjamin - The level of modification you can make to a ChasePlane camera is overwhelming.  I am one that appreciates a very well thought out interface and detail-level settings for all manner of camera locations, motions and vibrations.  Suggest you have a look at some of the tutorial videos the developer has released here.  

I was a long time EZDok user, and understand there are still faithful followers of that application.  But ChasePlane is the new kid on the block, and it definitely looks the part and performs brilliantly here at my end. Gotta love competition!

[RALF9636 1,904]

14 hours ago, Benjamin J said:

... and my main reason to have it would be for the in-cockpit camera effects...

Just like me - and that is why I prefer EZDok2.

I had been using Chaseplane for a while but never was satisfied with the realism of the motion effects. They were to harsh and abrupt, there was no feeling of floating in the air, just felt unrealistic to me. Outside of turbulences it felt more like riding a train than flying an aircraft - there were no motions at all. Despite the dozens of tweaking options in Chaseplane I didn't manage to achieve motion effects that felt realistic to me. Over time they added more and more features (which mostly I would never use) but they did not significantly improve that core feature.

When I changed to EZDok2 it was a whole new feeling of flying. EZDok2 gives a feel of floating in the air, also outside of turbulence. Also the ground and touchdown effects feel much more realistic to me. And on takeoff you really feel the moment you get airborne.

Because I never looked back at Chaseplane after I moved to EZDok2 I don't know if there were improvements to the Chaseplane motion effects within the last three months.

And of course this is a subjective matter. In the end you have to decide for yourself which motion effects you like best.

 

Regarding PTA: If you decide for ENVTEX you can simply add ENVSHADE which includes the most essential features of PTA. There are no options, it just comes as it is, but gives a very nice result. PTA has dozens of settings to play around with, but if you re not into tweaking but rather flying, ENVSHADE might be good enough for you (like it is for me).

 

Edited March 9, 2018 by RALF9636

[Benjamin J 751]

Thanks Doug and Ralf for your two cents. It's exactly this dichotomy in opinions that makes it hard for me to settle on one of the two. I've been watching a slew of YouTube videos that discuss Chaseplane, hoping to get a sense of the in-sim camera effects, but I keep feeling that Chaseplane's camera effects just aren't very pronounced. For example, how pronounced is the motion effect when you touch down roughly? Or if you turn quickly? Is this the kind of thing that can be tuned to make it more pronounced if you wish?

The thing is that I'm not willing to spend $40 on a gamble like that, especially as there is no refund policy. Again, the whole shabang with putting cameras in various places, moving cameras around and cinematic-type stuff is of very little importance to me (I'll admit it's a nice bonus, but that's where it ends...). The only thing I care for in EZDok v2 vs ChasePlane is how well they simulate the  effects of physics on the human body, by moving the camera appropriately.

So Ralf, I find it easy to be drawn to your description, which sounds like exactly my kind of situation. Doug, could you perhaps comment more on the motion effects? In the tutorials you linked to it doesn't seem that this specific feature is really delved into particularly deeply. And the overwhelming majority of reviews that I have read/watched on Youtube mostly discuss the fancy controls for positioning and moving cameras. And that, again, is something I care little about... Meanwhile, EZDok v2 has some wonderful videos showing off exactly the motion effect features. So was born my idea that Chaseplane is particularly well-suited for making cinematics, but less so for simulating the effect of flight on the human body by moving the camera appropriately. And so it seems clear to me that EZDok will do what I want it to do, but I'm still not sure to what extent Chaseplane mimics these features.

[Sartanius 399]

3 hours ago, Benjamin J said:

Doug, could you perhaps comment more on the motion effects? In the tutorials you linked to it doesn't seem that this specific feature is really delved into particularly deeply. And the overwhelming majority of reviews that I have read/watched on Youtube mostly discuss the fancy controls for positioning and moving cameras. And that, again, is something I care little about... Meanwhile, EZDok v2 has some wonderful videos showing off exactly the motion effect features. So was born my idea that Chaseplane is particularly well-suited for making cinematics, but less so for simulating the effect of flight on the human body by moving the camera appropriately. And so it seems clear to me that EZDok will do what I want it to do, but I'm still not sure to what extent Chaseplane mimics these features.

Benjamin - I'm very happy to help here, but a quick disclaimer.  I prefer chocolate ice cream vs. vanilla, not because chocolate is in any way better from a consumer point of view, it is just a personal preference.  So it is with ChasePlane (CP) and EZDok2.  I have no dog in the fight when it comes to your choice, I'm really just thrilled you, and all the rest of us, have a choice.

First picture shows main CP interface for my A2A C182:

Second picture shows positioning controls for my main Pilot In Command (PIC) camera:

Third picture shows motion effects I can apply to the PIC camera.  Note the three categories you can adjust motion effects for, Aircraft, Environment, and Human. Note here that each of the adjustment scales has a "Tune" button below it::

Forth picture shows the Tune settings for the Aircraft/Acceleration scale shown in the third picture above:

Fifth picture show the Tune settings for the Environment/Ground scale in the third picture above:

And finally, the sixth picture shows the Tune settings for Human/Anticipation scale shown in the third picture above:

Playing with all these settings does indeed give you ground shaking/bouncing during taxi, head jerking at touchdown, anticipatory head movements during turns, etc. and all the amplitudes are adjustable as well as inertia effects.

I can't vouch for how these movements differ from the same effects in EZDok2 since I no longer use it.  It could very well be that the EZDok2 implementation is more "real" and pleasing to the user, but only you can judge that for yourself.  Just trying to give you more information to help you make your final decision.  No doubt you'll be happy no matter which product you choose.  Have fun!

[Benjamin J 751]

Doug, thank you for the informative post, that's exactly what I needed! I understand it's down to preference - the problem is that so far I hadn't really gotten an insight into abilities of the camera motions in Chaseplane, which your post has now remedied to a large extent, so thank you! Now it'll be up to me to figure out what works best for me.

I like chocolate too, by the way 

[Sartanius 399]

4 minutes ago, Benjamin J said:

I like chocolate too, by the way 

+1

[antonvs 76]

On 09/03/2018 at 3:27 AM, Benjamin J said:

RE TrackIR: I.....

 

Ha! That looks awesome, actually. Thanks for bringing it up, and for your 2 cents Doug! How does it compare with PFPX? I would really only use it to plan quick IFR flights, I'm not particularly in need of very advanced options. Really, the main reason I used a flight planner like FSBuild was so that I could export the flight plan into various FMS formats, which it seems LNM does. Is LNM a good alternative of would you still recommend PFPX?

I gave up using PFPX some time ago in preference to LNM. With regard to exporting flight plans the big one for me is that it exports to F1 GTN750 format, and that covers the bulk of my popular planes.

[Benjamin J 751]

Thanks Anton! Good to hear. I'll with LNM for now, and if I need anything more I might look into PFPX... Sounds like I won't need to though!

[Litmoose 90]

I've been re-looking for some freeware since I last formatted that I cant for the life of me remember what it was called now. But basically it was a database of past and present flights, you could narrow down what you were looking for by departure/arrival airport, aircraft type and even which decade, then just click the refresh table button and it would list the results.

 

I found this very useful for finding older real life routes for older aircraft. Does anyone know what its called?