49 minutes ago, alanlj44 said:

In fact, they're part of some not so small textures (4K), but it is obvious it is a remnant of some old optimization fake shadowing technique (ambient occlusion as we calls it) which was in favor in rendering engines from a decade ago and more, as real time ambient occlusion was quite GPU hungry back then. Problem is, it looks like it was a 512x512 texture that has been simply overstretched like crazy to 4096x4096, giving catastrophic results 😅 I can't believe this has made its way done like this in MSFS for such a high priced product. This is really cutting the corners, they should have subcontracted a seasoned 3D artist/texture artist for this release. I thought Leonardo was even more god-tier dev than PMDG?
I'm getting rid of that since MSFS already has built-in real time ambient occlusion (we're in 2020+ you know...) and might experiment with it a bit (touchup here and there to emphasize sense of depth).

Don't get me wrong, the texture work was not inherently bad at all for the time it was released in P3D! I'm not criticizing the artist behind it, it was actually good and solid work! BUT it is work from a bygone era of old rendering engines and GPUs and their limits at the time... With that being said, there's so much noise and low-res pixelization that the enhancing softwares and techniques I use have a hard time coping with it and has a tendency to make things look artificial a bit, like it was hand painted and have a bit of a cartoony look (or oil painting look). Still it looks better IMO, and I'm working on not enhancing but replace some parts from scratch where it can't be enhanced enough. For example windshield seals, some details like the jeppesen airway manual, etc.

Thanks for your efforts. So when we said, the textures were just pure port from P3D with little efforts made for MSFS standards, that was correct 😄. Also if not mistaken, they are not using decals, that is like the most awesome feature of MSFS that exists in FBW and CRJ which allows the up-scalling for the small details parts with little impact of performance.  

Yeah I’ve noticed some really pixelated awful textures at night that appear to be some layer on top of the cabin textures to give a shadowing/shading appearance. I could probably count the pixels in it. If it could be removed it would probably be a huge improvement.

I had 4 CTD's back to back yesterday when trying to use MSFS ground services. I tried to see if all of them including the fuel truck can work with the Maddog. After 4 CTD's not using default ground services resulted in a successful flight with no CTD's. This makes me think that it is not fully integrated to use even the default ground services. It feels awkward when you connect the GPU from EFB and go outside to see there is no GPU connected to the aircraft physically. It is a little disappointing to see even small things like this is not considered by the developer where this claims to be a high fidelity aircraft that should support the simulated immersion. Aircraft systems development is  onething but in my opinion high fidelity is a package that should have all the bells and whistles required for the aircraft including ground services working properly. I'm tempted to believe that this was a P3D port where developer only re-coded or re-organized the code to work with MSFS and no other efforts are put in to bring it up to the new standard. As I use the aircraft more I came to realize it is not just ported textures. A bunch of other little things are present as well.

IMHO it is still hard to justify the price, time will tell how much they care.

Edited May 5, 20224 yr by the_simpilot

8 minutes ago, the_simpilot said:

I had 4 CTD's back to back yesterday when trying to use MSFS ground services. I tried to see if all of them including the fuel truck can work with the Maddog. After 4 CTD's not using default ground services resulted in a successful flight with no CTD's. This makes me think that it is not fully integrated to use even the default ground services. It feels awkward when you connect the GPU from EFB and go outside to see there is no GPU connected to the aircraft physically. It is a little disappointing to see even small things like this is not considered by the developer where this claims to be a high fidelity aircraft that should support the simulated immersion. Aircraft systems development is  onething but in my opinion high fidelity is a package that should have all the bells and whistles required for the aircraft including ground services working properly. I'm tempted to believe that this was a P3D port where developer only re-coded or re-organized the code to work with MSFS and no other efforts are put in to bring it up to the new standard. As I use the aircraft more I came to realize it is not just ported textures. A bunch of other little things are present as well.

IMHO it is still hard to justify the price, time will tell how much they care.

What? The Maddog is specifically made to interact with the MSFS ground services, it actually works best from all aircraft I own (32NX included). If you want to see a GPU, just call one. It will connect perfectly to the aircraft, just as any other ground sevice, and it will activate automatically the GPU in the EFB (= you have power). I'd rather have that than some default model I cannot change with GSX or something (like with PMDG).

Also the fuel truck works just fine for me and I have not yet had a single CTD with the Maddog, so the problem lies somewhere else for you.

By the way you are even contradicting yourself within two consecutive phrases: At first you complain about the MaddogX not being "fully integrated" with the MSFS default ground services, and in the next sentence you complain that it has no custom GPU model and instead uses the MSFS one... go figure.

9 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

What? The Maddog is specifically made to interact with the MSFS ground services, it actually works best from all aircraft I own (32NX included). If you want to see a GPU, just call one. It will connect perfectly to the aircraft, just as any other ground sevice, and it will activate automatically the GPU in the EFB (= you have power). I'd rather have that than some default model I cannot change with GSX or something (like with PMDG).

Also the fuel truck works just fine for me and I have not yet had a single CTD with the Maddog, so the problem lies somewhere else for you.

By the way you are even contradicting yourself within two consecutive phrases: At first you complain about the MaddogX not being "fully integrated" with the MSFS default ground services, and in the next sentence you complain that it has no custom GPU model and instead uses the MSFS one... go figure.

I don't see it as a contradiction. If the default is the one I'm having problems with I'd expect a custom model to work that's why my comment states that and yes it is the ground services for me not sure what else conflicts with it. I can't pinpoint to another thing than that. 

By the way to your statement, it is not a complaint but it is more of an observation/comparison.

Edited May 5, 20224 yr by the_simpilot

46 minutes ago, the_simpilot said:

After 4 CTD's not using default ground services resulted in a successful flight with no CTD's.

I have a different issue, sometime if I am switching to maddog_lm when the aircraft is on the ground C&D, it will freeze the switch completely, the only way to fix it, is to exit the flight and start a new one 

Just now, bendead said:

I have a different issue, sometime if I am switching to maddog_lm when the aircraft is on the ground C&D, it will freeze the switch completely, the only way to fix it, is to exit the flight and start a new one 

Which switch?

3 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Which switch?

All of them, even EFB hide/unhide clickspot, it's like the all cockpit is dead

9 minutes ago, bendead said:

All of them, even EFB hide/unhide clickspot, it's like the all cockpit is dead

Okay, I don't use the load manager in-flight, as all I need can be done with the EFB. So I cannot confirm or help you out. What do you need the load manager for in-flight, if I may ask?

2 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

What do you need the load manager for in-flight, if I may ask?

It was not for "normal operation", but more for testing the manager options and to try to get the flight plan from acars to fms.

Alright so almost a week is over and I used the Maddog every day, mostly on Vatsim. It worked perfect and - to my suprise - I was not overwhelmed when ATC wanted something from me. LNAV and VNAV worked perfectly, I'm honest here. It was a 100%. It is however a lot more challenging then the A32NX on Vatsim, not because of the basic AP controls, but because you have to flip so many switches all the time for other stuff (well you don't "have" to for Vatsim, but I'd like to not have my virtual pax to choke to death or leave the electronic hydraulic pumps on for 8 hours).

1 minute ago, bendead said:

It was not for "normal operation", but more for testing the manager options and to try to get the flight plan from acars to fms.

The latter you can do entirely without the load manager, if you use Simbrief: Download the simbrief plan and put it into communit/lsh-maddog-aircraft/routes. Done. You can now load it via the COROUTE in the FMS. The same works with the ACARS files (for w&b) from simbrief, put them into the same folder, then you can just click "import" in the EFB.

Edited May 5, 20224 yr by Fiorentoni

4 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

You can now load it via the COROUTE in the FMS

Cheers 😉

Edited May 5, 20224 yr by bendead

1 minute ago, Fiorentoni said:

The latter you can do entirely without the load manager, if you use Simbrief: Download the simbrief plan and put it into communit/lsh-maddog-aircraft/routes. Done. You can now load it via the COROUTE in the FMS. The same works with the ACARS files (for w&b) from simbrief, put them into the same folder, then you can just click "import" in the EFB.

What about an IFR /ILS landing flight set up in MSFS Scenario Set Up?

Can that be imported into the FMC & activated & have the aircraft follow the magenta line. [In fact I find with most AP/GPS aircraft in MSFS they will 'follow' parallel to the line, but off to the side a few miles, which I think is an Asobo thing]

T45

Just now, Treetops45 said:

What about an IFR /ILS landing flight set up in MSFS Scenario Set Up?

Can that be imported into the FMC & activated & have the aircraft follow the magenta line. [In fact I find with most AP/GPS aircraft in MSFS they will 'follow' parallel to the line, but off to the side a few miles, which I think is an Asobo thing]

T45

Sorry, no idea, as I only use Simbrief.