much less complaints about P3D5.1 HF1

[neilhewitt 494]

49 minutes ago, simbol said:

You tried the P3D .NET Simconnect implementation? no need for a wrapper if you use it.. it is all .NET native..

Yes, I'm using the managed library. That's what I'm putting a wrapper around 🙂. They made some odd choices there - eg I really don't understand the desire to turn what are basically unsigned int parameters into Enum types other than to have some kind of local lookup table - but Enums are not well done in .NET generally and I'd rather just be able to use the uint directly. The use of Enum in the method signatures specifically has made my life difficult because of constraints in the .NET type system. It's just a very specific wrapper around the bits I'm currently using (mostly getting sim objects by type or ID, and intercepting some of the events) but it may get more generic as I use more of Simconnect. Basically I'm not really comfortable with the COM idiom and I'd like something that's more idiomatically C# (as I see it). It's actually a fun exercise as I haven't done properly event-driven coding for a long time. I rarely ever touch WinForms or WPF and neither really exposes the guts of the Win32 / COM underpinnings unless you need it to. 

I guess this is getting a touch too technical for the average viewer of this thread, so I'll stop here... but I'll continue spelunking into the interior of Managed Simconnect. 

[Patco Lch 1,465]

On 11/26/2020 at 6:12 PM, AdiR said:

I've just bought 737 Immersion V2, love Black Fridays 😉 BTW, good job 🙂

Hi Adrian. I'm looking hard at this addon but have about reached my limit for Black Friday budget so could you tell me how you like it. I don't care so much about outside effects but am interested in improving the taxi lights for night taxing. Does it add greatly to landing and taxi lights? Might grab it for PMDG 747 as well as 737 NGXu if it helps. Shame PMDG doesn't do a better job in the light reflecting at night. Leonardo is beautiful at night.

[AdiR 27]

5 hours ago, PATCO LCH said:

Hi Adrian. I'm looking hard at this addon but have about reached my limit for Black Friday budget so could you tell me how you like it. I don't care so much about outside effects but am interested in improving the taxi lights for night taxing. Does it add greatly to landing and taxi lights? Might grab it for PMDG 747 as well as 737 NGXu if it helps. Shame PMDG doesn't do a better job in the light reflecting at night. Leonardo is beautiful at night.

Hi,

I don't use EA (it's good during a day, in the night there are still many issues I don't like). I bought it mainly for volumetric lights that you can see with low visibility outside and outside effects  (for screenshots, clips, etc.).

I think Simbol could confirm if this product changes taxi and landing lights brightness with/without EA, with low/normal visibility, because I haven't done any comparison 'with Immersion vs. no Immersion' yet, so can't tell you to buy it or not 🙂 Honestly I wouldn't buy it with regular price, because this is not the addon I really needed (it doesn't mean it's overpriced). But I bought it and I'm really happy with it. If you want - I can send you the screenshots from Immersion control panel so you can see all the options you can configure.

You can still change landing and taxi lights color and brightness in effect files at your own risk. It's very easy to do.

Edited November 28, 2020 by AdiR

[Patco Lch 1,465]

5 hours ago, AdiR said:

Hi,

I don't use EA (it's good during a day, in the night there are still many issues I don't like). I bought it mainly for volumetric lights that you can see with low visibility outside and outside effects  (for screenshots, clips, etc.).

I think Simbol could confirm if this product changes taxi and landing lights brightness with/without EA, with low/normal visibility, because I haven't done any comparison 'with Immersion vs. no Immersion' yet, so can't tell you to buy it or not 🙂 Honestly I wouldn't buy it with regular price, because this is not the addon I really needed (it doesn't mean it's overpriced). But I bought it and I'm really happy with it. If you want - I can send you the screenshots from Immersion control panel so you can see all the options you can configure.

You can still change landing and taxi lights color and brightness in effect files at your own risk. It's very easy to do.

Thanks for the reply. I guess I ll pass on this one. 

[Flic1 977]

On 11/27/2020 at 9:23 PM, PATCO LCH said:

Hi Adrian. I'm looking hard at this addon but have about reached my limit for Black Friday budget so could you tell me how you like it. I don't care so much about outside effects but am interested in improving the taxi lights for night taxing. Does it add greatly to landing and taxi lights? Might grab it for PMDG 747 as well as 737 NGXu if it helps. Shame PMDG doesn't do a better job in the light reflecting at night. Leonardo is beautiful at night.

It will not make the taxi/landing lights brighter but it adds the volumetric effect when in low visibility.  I have found the brightness issue with the lights depends on the surface textures....the darker they are the less the lights reflect.  If you are on concrete textures they are much brighter.....

[BestPlane 18]

I must say clouds with v5.1 HF1 and the latest Active Sky build have never looked more horrific

[mpo910 2,112]

6 minutes ago, BestPlane said:

I must say clouds with v5.1 HF1 and the latest Active Sky build have never looked more horrific

HiFi is working on this. LM changed something which has negative impact on cloud resolution.

With ASP3D RC4 close to release, regarding Damian from HiFi, it will probably look better.

Copy these settings in your volumetricclouds.cfg file from p3D (Overwrite the original ones) will look less edgy and less pixelated. the changes compared to the original parameters are in BOLD

The parameters changed at the cloud models with "persistance" are responsible for the edgy look. the edge_noise_wavelength setting does flatten the edges more out so does also do something about more smoothnes.

the draw distance is up to you. I changed it to lower to avoid the clouds looking way to high at horizon. Reducing the drawing does eliminate it and does minimal increase performance hardly noticeable).  

Marcus

[Global]
render_grid_x_km_low = 0.3
render_grid_x_km_med = 0.3
render_grid_x_km_high = 0.2
render_grid_x_km_ultra = 0.15
render_grid_z_km_low = 3.0
render_grid_z_km_med = 3.0
render_grid_z_km_high = 3.0
render_grid_z_km_ultra = 3.0
cloud_resolution_low = 256
cloud_resolution_med = 512
cloud_resolution_high = 512
cloud_resolution_ultra = 768
max_cloud_distance_km_low = 200
max_cloud_distance_km_med = 250
max_cloud_distance_km_high = 125  //300
max_cloud_distance_km_ultra = 350
num_slices_low = 128
num_slices_med = 128
num_slices_high = 128
num_slices_ultra = 128
cloud_shadow_strength = 1.5
cloud_shadow_range_km_low = 100.0
cloud_shadow_range_km_med = 175.0
cloud_shadow_range_km_high = 250.0
cloud_shadow_range_km_ultra = 300.0
cloud_shadow_texture_size_low = 256
cloud_shadow_texture_size_med = 512
cloud_shadow_texture_size_high = 512 //1024
cloud_shadow_texture_size_ultra = 2048
crepuscular_ray_strength = 1.0
edge_noise_wavelength_km = 2.7  //2.5
worley_texture_size = 64
cell_noise_wavelength_km = 2.7
max_fractal_amplitude_km = 3
cloud_threshold_distance_km = 0.2

[Cumulonimbus]
max_density_gm3 = 1.0
distribution_base_layer = 0.25
distribution_transition = 0.25
worley_noise = 0.6
worley_scale = 5.0
diffusivity = 0.9
persistence = 0.63 //0.95
octaves = 3.0
upper_density = 0.35
simulation = 0.0
cloud_width_km = 100
cloudiness = 0.15
base_noise_factor = 0.25
edge_worley_noise = 0.15
fractal_amplitude = 2.0
edge_sharpness = 2.7
churn = 1.0

[Cirrus]
max_density_gm3 = 0.05
distribution_base_layer = 0.05
distribution_transition = 0.95
worley_noise = 0.55
worley_scale = 1.0
diffusivity = 0.95
persistence = 0.95
octaves = 3.0
upper_density = 0.95
simulation = 0.0
cloud_width_km = 30
cloudiness = 0.1
base_noise_factor = 0.95
edge_worley_noise = 0.0
fractal_amplitude = 1.5
edge_sharpness = 0.05
churn = 0.2

[Stratus]
max_density_gm3 = 1.0
distribution_base_layer = 0.2
distribution_transition = 0.5
worley_noise = 0.55
worley_scale = 3.0
diffusivity = 0.95
persistence = 0.05
octaves = 3.0
upper_density = 0.05
simulation = 0.0
cloud_width_km = 100
cloudiness = 0.15
base_noise_factor = 0.1
edge_worley_noise = 0.05
fractal_amplitude = 1.0
edge_sharpness = 0.1
churn = 1.0

[Cumulus]
max_density_gm3 = 1.0
distribution_base_layer = 0.25
distribution_transition = 0.25
worley_noise = 0.6
worley_scale = 5.0
diffusivity = 0.9
persistence = 0.63  //0.95
octaves = 3.0
upper_density = 0.25
simulation = 0.0
cloud_width_km = 100
cloudiness = 0.15
base_noise_factor = 0.25
edge_worley_noise = 0.15
fractal_amplitude = 2.0
edge_sharpness = 2.7
churn = 1.0
 

Edited November 29, 2020 by mpo910

[kingm56 1,031]

On 11/26/2020 at 5:31 AM, Ray Proudfoot said:

FS Labs are developing a 64-bit version of Concorde for P3D v4 and v5. Given they have said there will only be one 64-bit Concorde that should reassure many they are fully committed to L-M. 👍

I don’t believe your assertion/interruption is accurate; specifically, FS Labs began coding the Concord long before MSFS was announced. It makes sense for them to complete their work while MSFS SDK matures; PMDG is executing a similar strategy with GFO and 777 upgrade/expansion. However, once these projects are complete, I’d bet anything the major aircraft Add-one shift to bringing their products to MSFS.  I’ll bet you’ll never see a clean sheet FSLabs, Aerosoft or PMDG aircraft for P3D again.  

[Ray Proudfoot 8,961]

22 minutes ago, kingm56 said:

I don’t believe your assertion/interruption is accurate; specifically, FS Labs began coding the Concord long before MSFS was announced. It makes sense for them to complete their work while MSFS SDK matures; PMDG is executing a similar strategy with GFO and 777 upgrade/expansion. However, once these projects are complete, I’d bet anything the major aircraft Add-one shift to bringing their products to MSFS.  I’ll bet you’ll never see a clean sheet FSLabs, Aerosoft or PMDG aircraft for P3D again.  

My assertion? Not my words but those of Lefteris Kalamaris. You don’t need to tell me about FS Labs’ Concorde development. I’ve had it for seven years initially for FSX and then P3D v3 and have followed all their announcements. They were developing it for P3D when MFS was announced and development was put on hold whilst they considered which way to proceed. They announced recently it would be for P3D v4 and 5.

Given the way MFS seems to be regressing rather than progressing I wouldn’t expect to see an SDK that PMDG et al can use for quite a while.

Youre entitled to your opinion on future aircraft for P3D but I don’t agree with it. There’s plenty of life in that sim.

[Rocky_53 1,579]

On 11/26/2020 at 11:49 PM, Paul J said:

er. .  um . . .   😚  not sure I should admit to that . . . .   🤔 could bring back some bad thoughts . . .

But, yeah - it is nice to be back, Bob (even as sporadically as it's been thus far) - and especially to recognise old names like yours, and to renew the aquaintances and friendships that we've all shared. I do intend to be here and participate more often - for the most part I'm simply lurking, picking brains (like yours) here and there. . .    There's so much new stuff my old mind has been boggling for weeks now! The learning curve and time spent on MSFS has been daunting, and with a decision made earlier this week to pursue v5.1 - there's more to come, as the expenditure for aircraft, scenery and all of the other addons has to be crammed into the day. Somewhere in there, there has to be a new GPU, too. (sigh) 

Yes - glad to see you!

Hey Paul, just gotta jump in here and say how great it is to see you back in the groove! Or should I say, pilot's seat! 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Rockliffe

[Paul J 349]

Hey Rocky! - Yah - 'twas very nice to see you here as well! You sound very healthy, (which is a good sign!). It's been a pleasure to come back in and meet 'n' greet the many other old fellers that are still here, and are still whinin' and complainin'! (Nothing changes, does it? !!!)   I've touched base with a number of them, but have yet to become "properly active" here. I'm find it hard to pick up the pace - the focused interest - of the past, with so many new things happening in the FS world: The experience has become quite overwhelming...
Anyway - money and time and a few patches will fix it all!

All the Best,

pj

 

[jaytee73 132]

What happened to the subject matter on this interesting thread - it seems to have been hijacked half way on page 2

[craigeaglefire 197]

On 11/30/2020 at 7:02 AM, Ray Proudfoot said:

Given the way MFS seems to be regressing rather than progressing

do you actually use MFS, Ray?

personally, i find MFS to be progressing really well - & enjoying all the other sims & addons in parallel.

[Benjamin J 751]

2 hours ago, jaytee73 said:

What happened to the subject matter on this interesting thread - it seems to have been hijacked half way on page 2

Allow me to perhaps bring the thread a little bit closer to its original topic.

The fact is that P3Dv5, in its most recent version, ahs given me all that I have asked for for a very, very long time. This is the first time ever that I can fly around the LA or NYC metro area with my choice of addons and get great performance. That, honestly, is worth everything to me. I'm sure the clouds will be sorted eventually. But, the fact that we get THIS kind of performance now is an absolute landmark achievement for as far as I'm concerned. That said, I also dialed back some key graphical parameters to ensure I don't starve VRAM. The solution, as simbol always said, is to get a graphics cards with more VRAM. So be it! I run my sim at 1024 textures and am perfectly happy with it. Would 2048 or 4096 be nicer? Of course, but 1024 is not nearly as bad as I thought it might be, and thus I can live with the compromise. See the screenshots below. I'm using a mix of MSE SoCal, OrbX TE SoCal buildings, FSDT KLAX, LatinVFR SNA and OrbX KBUR. Still flying around at 30FPS despite dense autogen, 80% AI traffic. I couldn't be more pleased with this!

[d.tsakiris 418]

 

 

1 hour ago, Benjamin J said:

The fact is that P3Dv5, in its most recent version, ahs given me all that I have asked for for a very, very long time. This is the first time ever that I can fly around the LA or NYC metro area with my choice of addons and get great performance. That, honestly, is worth everything to me. I'm sure the clouds will be sorted eventually. But, the fact that we get THIS kind of performance now is an absolute landmark achievement for as far as I'm concerned.

I second that. It also looks great!