Just curious if the default ATC has improved in V5 ?

Nope

No, because this would require actual development work, rather than just slapping a fresh coat of paint on 15 year old FSX code.

3 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

No, because this would require actual development work, rather than just slapping a fresh coat of paint on 15 year old FSX code.

I thought that we were done with these type of posts. Consider the irony. People yell and scream for a new "engine" and that the code is old. So LM makes a whole bunch of changes, right up to now with DX12 and TrueSky and now people are complaining that their hardware can't handle it. Maybe LM should have stopped with P3d 1.4.

9 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

So LM makes a whole bunch of changes, right up to now with DX12 and TrueSky and now people are complaining that their hardware can't handle it. Maybe LM should have stopped with P3d 1.4.

Yup, I must admit it is making me smile that people are complaining about the new sim using VRAM. That's what we've been asking for since before FSX came out FFS! It is why for years, we've all had to keep buying motherboards and CPUs which made Hal 900 look like a ZX-80, just to get half-decent frame rates. Finally we get a sim which throws the load at the GPU and people wanna moan about it?

Decent ATC is something we've had for years, via loads of TPDs. Yeah it might be nice if it was improved a bit in the default sim, but it's not exactly a priority when there are a ton of alternatives.

Edited April 15, 20206 yr by Chock

On my rig, all the departing AI are getting stuck in the "clearance" state and not pushing back (stuck at the gate).  Is anyone else seeing that?

1 hour ago, Clipper Ocean Spray said:

On my rig, all the departing AI are getting stuck in the "clearance" state and not pushing back (stuck at the gate).  Is anyone else seeing that?

It's definitely something amiss with the airport file. Some 3rd party developers use a zero width for taxiway links. Others put the hold short nodes too far from the runway. You might want to look around for a revised ADE file for that specific airport, that is designed to display correct AI behavior.

In case anyone is wondering, I copied my (highly) modified voice pack file over from my v4 installation and it appears to work without issues.

8 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

No, because this would require actual development work, rather than just slapping a fresh coat of paint on 15 year old FSX code.

Good on you for showing the courage to call out verifiable logic in this ridiculous and perpetual flight sim "beta" culture. I love the reformer who is not afraid to state the facts for the sake of us all.

Cheers.

Edited April 16, 20206 yr by Ezra

4 hours ago, Chock said:

Yup, I must admit it is making me smile that people are complaining about the new sim using VRAM. That's what we've been asking for since before FSX came out FFS! It is why for years, we've all had to keep buying motherboards and CPUs which made Hal 900 look like a ZX-80, just to get half-decent frame rates. Finally we get a sim which throws the load at the GPU and people wanna moan about it?

Decent ATC is something we've had for years, via loads of TPDs. Yeah it might be nice if it was improved a bit in the default sim, but it's not exactly a priority when there are a ton of alternatives.

From my understanding of the many posts about this, and I may be wrong, is that is not so much using VRAM but rather it just crashes when it uses too much. While not the same problem, it brings back terrible memories of the bad old OOM days (that were not that long ago)

6 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

 So LM makes a whole bunch of changes, right up to now with DX12 and TrueSky...

Wasn't TrueSky part of Dovetail's FSW? I can't recall this going to well for DTG----- Where's the real innovation?

6 hours ago, Chock said:

Yup, I must admit it is making me smile that people are complaining about the new sim using VRAM. That's what we've been asking

Aren’t choking VRam with textures when the card is less than 8 GB which seems the case here and having a more extensive use of the GPU in conjunction with the CPU two different issues ? 

24 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

Wasn't TrueSky part of Dovetail's FSW? I can't recall this going to well for DTG----- Where's the real innovation?

The real innovation will be with MSFS. In time we may also see some with P3D5.

My main issues with version 4 were poor performance and outdated airports. Version 5 addresses this so I'm very happy.

4 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

It's definitely something amiss with the airport file. Some 3rd party developers use a zero width for taxiway links. Others put the hold short nodes too far from the runway. You might want to look around for a revised ADE file for that specific airport, that is designed to display correct AI behavior.

Thanks.  I haven't gotten around to installing any add ons yet.  I haven't seen one default AI jet push back from a gate (after hearing them get clearance) at the many different default airports I checked.  It is really strange.

It’s really something to see the true believers moving the goalposts in real time. “Actually, didn’t you know that what we’ve been asking for this whole time is for the sim to simply load up VRAM until the sim crashes, bringing back arbitrary CTDs the banishing of which was literally the whole rationale for the previous version?”