21 minutes ago, RobJC said:

It really is a massive leap. MSFS literally sucked the air out of the industry. But...they have a long way to go. And that is the only hope P3D and XP have. They have time, but they have Mount Everest to climb. Should be a fun year watching how they respond to the juggernaut that is MSFS. 

Totally🙂

Last used flight sim around six years ago (pc blow up) and a couple weeks ago saw this!

Beyond visuals/scenery as an actual "flight simulator"  this is potentially awesome . Scenery is pretty much there

and with 3rd party developers... weather, plane systems, ATC, AI and so on, i dont know maybe two years?

37 minutes ago, RobJC said:

It really is a massive leap. MSFS literally sucked the air out of the industry. But...they have a long way to go. And that is the only hope P3D and XP have. They have time, but they have Mount Everest to climb. Should be a fun year watching how they respond to the juggernaut that is MSFS. 

The game has one-dimensional scenery (no seasons) and nice weather. The rest is kind of a mess with all of the bugs, lack of add-ons, pathetic SDK.

 

50 minutes ago, N7470 said:

I just did a quick takeoff test from SAN in the 152.  Power was normal and was able to climb at 500 fpm with no problems. 

There are two options for mixture axis.  I am using "mixture -100 to 100" on the "engine 4" lever on the CH quadrant.   The other option is "mixture 0 to 100" which I don't think works right on this controller.

I also have all the toggle and magneto switches unbound on the Alpha and am not using FSUIPC at all if that helps.

I am using Mix for Eng 1 & 2 on the 2 furthest left with the 0-100 option. I have Throttle on the middle 2 and Prop on the Right 2, all 0-100 option. The 2 left ones are on a different axis it seems and I couldn't seem to get as good of throttle control on the 2 left sticks is why I have it set up that way. Do you have the Throttle and Prop set using the -100 to 100 option also? If so that may be the cause of all my complaints about the Throttle Quad since starting with it when the new sim came out. It worked great in the previous 2 versions. Just trying to buy time until I get me Bravo.

I am off to try your suggestion.

21 minutes ago, langly said:

The game has one-dimensional scenery (no seasons) and nice weather. The rest is kind of a mess with all of the bugs, lack of add-ons, pathetic SDK.

As seen from a hater. I just love it, despite some loose ends. And I have flown all sims since FS4.

Kind regards, Michael

36 minutes ago, langly said:

The game has one-dimensional scenery (no seasons)

You know how hard it would be to do seasons with satellite imagery? They're working on it, they want it to be convincing.

Quote

 lack of add-ons.

The sim just came out 2 months ago, give it time. Impatient much?

Edited October 30, 20205 yr by Tuskin38

Here's my soon to be lost and ignored input on the new update, all specifically from my perspective.  Ran a C172 flight from KBUR to KSNA, which is right over the heart of Los Angeles, CA, USA

1.  Visuals are excellent!  My C172 seemed fine with its flight, but I'm not a pilot so what do I really know.

2. Performance has digressed, but understandably.  But given I was running 30 fps externally limited, using nearly full Ultra settings and live weather, it was stuttering hard in places due to a choked out main thread, first hand witnessed by using their developer mode FPS display.  In these place my gcard was in running at about 80-90% with available vram.  This does NOT bode well, for this was run using my 5Ghz OC on my below listed computer.  This looks to me that it's FSX all over again!  Let's hope some serious performance optimization are in the works.

Edited October 31, 20205 yr by TheFamilyMan
needed to fix for politeness

4 minutes ago, TheFamilyMan said:

But given I was running 30 fps externally limited, using nearly full Ultra settings and live weather

Try running it with "high" settings instead of "Ultra" as a test.

Even though it may not be popular, lowering settings actually works 😉

Edited October 31, 20205 yr by Bert Pieke

Will give it a try...but what fun is that 😄!

11 minutes ago, TheFamilyMan said:

Will give it a try...but what fun is that 😄!

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder some say!

The GTX 1070 is probably the most limiting factor compared to your 10700K, but you might want to review and try the following suggestions:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/my-2070-super-4k-settings-and-suggestions-episode-2/272854

26 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Even though it may not be popular, lowering settings actually works 😉

I experienced this today and it is likely system dependent.  I was flying along at 2560 X 1440 and everything was great.  No stutters, smooth as butter.  So I switched to 3840 X 2160 and found the sim just as smooth. But the scenery lost some quality rather than gained quality.  It was no bad.  Still highly detailed.  I expected that I would experience performance issues, frame rates, stutters, etc.  Those did not occur.  Back to 2560 X 1440 and clearly happier.

Still waiting for an opportunity to snag a 3080...

10 minutes ago, fppilot said:

experienced this today and it is likely system dependent.  I was flying along at 2560 X 1440 and everything was great.  No stutters, smooth as butter.  So I switched to 3840 X 2160 and found the sim just as smooth. But the scenery lost some quality rather than gained quality. 

Hi Frank,

This is exactly what I've found out early on when trying to balance the settings. In my FS2020 forum post linked above, I'm commenting on this (and the settings in general). I might be wrong but at the time of the writing (FS2020 v1.7.12 I believe) it was looking exactly like it was doing this:

Quote

 

[...] I’ve also noticed the FS2020 rendering engine might be prioritizing some of the settings if there is contention and the visual outcome might sometimes be contrary to what you’d expect. It is like having less buildings drawn in the distance despite maximizing the draw distance. This makes sense because besides the time resource in a bucket (how many ms before next frame) and the speed at which the video card can process the pixels, there is also a finite resource of VRam and when a resource takes a chunk the video card might discard another one. If the demand is higher than the resource, the driver and the engine will have to constantly stream resources and this is causing a performance hit. This is exactly the same problem when the OS is paging memory on a HDD because too many programs are using the available RAM.

 

 

Edited October 31, 20205 yr by RXP

I finally allowed the sim to update, with no issues so far. I emptied my Community Folder and unplugged all USB devices before updating. No CTD... so far🤞

Only flown  2 short flights. The mottled reflection effect on glass seems to have been toned down, to a level which now at least resembles what might actually happen on older glass surfaces.

 

Somebody thought one of the steam gauges on the C152 had been replaced by a digital display (can't find the post now). I took a screenshot both before and after the update and I can confirm there is no change following the update.

56 minutes ago, 109Sqn said:

Somebody thought one of the steam gauges on the C152 had been replaced by a digital display (can't find the post now).

🙄 They probably selected the Aerobat version of the C152 by mistake (easy to do).  That does indeed have a digital type g-meter.

Just now, bobcat999 said:

🙄 They probably selected the Aerobat version of the C152 by mistake (easy to do).  That does indeed have a digital type g-meter.

Ah, that would make sense. Since I haven't done my upgrade yet, I don't have access to that one.

7 hours ago, langly said:

The game has one-dimensional scenery

One dimensional?! The game has payware or near-payware quality scenery for 90% of the world...