Maybe this should have been 'What has changed since lunch?'

I don't see this one lasting much longer, maybe a few hours.

On 7/12/2022 at 6:17 AM, flightsim1818 said:

Are my observations correct? 

Does it really make a difference?

You need to spend more time & invest some money on the new aircraft to see what has improved or needs to be improved. You can be a part of the growth or live vicariously through this community. I'm not part of the beta, but I monitor what's coming in SU10.

Only YOU can judge if it works for you now and in the near future.

I have a similar question to the OP and thought I could dove tail mine into this thread rather than start a new one…

I’ve been gone for 18 months and have wondered if some of the things that frustrated me with IFR have been addressed. Can anyone comment on these prior issues… have they been addressed?

- Adding an approach on arrival had the plane doing a u-turn to some user waypoint (both the Garmin 1000 and FBW 320)

- FBW 320 could not do RNAV - no glide down - it would just fly over the runway at your last set elevation

- ATC often gave conflicting, dangerous, or impossible altitude assignments requiring it be ignored most of the time.

In addition, back when I gave up, LoD was pretty bad, and if you turned it up by editing a config file, it killed performance. It was also CPU single thread constrained, barely using the GPU or other cores in the system. I could only get 30-40FPS on a 5800/3090 setup. Has the performance improved at all? Did the DX12 port ever happen? What was the result?

Performance is MILES ahead of when it was first launched, and the payware plane selection is MUCH MUCH better, though still a bit lacking for the faster GA flyers.

Other than improved performance and flight choices and more scenery available, a few other areas of visuals have degraded like clouds.
That said, overall it's still a better experience, plus there are faster CPU-GPU's for not too extreme pricing right now, so you can also upgrade your PC a lot cheaper than before.

 

 

Edited July 20, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery

Quote

Has the performance improved at all? Did the DX12 port ever happen? What was the result?

Your questions appear to be specific and technical.
They really have no place in this entirely subjective topic and of course,
all of them can be answered by reinstalling MSFS and looking for yourself.
Perhaps that is a suggestion that is too radical.

Edited July 20, 20223 yr by Reader

1 hour ago, Alpine Scenery said:

Performance is MILES ahead of when it was first launched, and the payware plane selection is MUCH MUCH better, though still a bit lacking for the faster GA flyers.

Other than improved performance and flight choices and more scenery available, a few other areas of visuals have degraded like clouds.
That said, overall it's still a better experience, plus there are faster CPU-GPU's for not too extreme pricing right now, so you can also upgrade your PC a lot cheaper than before.

 

 

Don't fall for it if the curious want to know let them find for themselves.

4 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

- Adding an approach on arrival had the plane doing a u-turn to some user waypoint (both the Garmin 1000 and FBW 320)

Sim Update 10, which is coming next month and is beta testing at the moment, no longer uses the Garmin 1000 for default GA planes.  It will use the Garmin 1000 NXi, developed by Working Title.  The Garmin 1000 NXi, will be the most advanced Garmin 1000, among all the flight simulators on the market today (ie.P3D, XP, MSFS).

Just wait for Sim Update 10 to release next month.

Edited July 20, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Sim Update 10, which is coming next month and is beta testing at the moment, no longer uses the Garmin 1000 for default GA planes.  It will use the Garmin 1000 NXi, developed by Working Title.  The Garmin 1000 NXi, will be the most advanced Garmin 1000, among all the flight simulators on the market today (ie.P3D, XP, MSFS).

Just wait for Sim Update 10 to release next month.

That’s good to hear. I was using their add-on back in the day. 

Do you know if there still an issue with a waypoint being added behind when entering an approach on arrival? Or did they fix this behaviour?

8 hours ago, Reader said:

Your questions appear to be specific and technical.
They really have no place in this entirely subjective topic and of course,
all of them can be answered by reinstalling MSFS and looking for yourself.
Perhaps that is a suggestion that is too radical.

Well at least the super helpful and friendly nature of this forum hasn’t changed at all 🙂

 

I’m not interested in hauling my cockpit out of storage unless I can get confirmation that some of the serious IFR issues have been addressed in the last 18 months. If this isn’t the right topic, I’m happy to start another one. 

Edited July 20, 20223 yr by Virtual-Chris

One other question… is there a way to review your landing from different external angles after you’ve parked?  

9 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

I have a similar question to the OP and thought I could dove tail mine into this thread rather than start a new one…

I’ve been gone for 18 months and have wondered if some of the things that frustrated me with IFR have been addressed. Can anyone comment on these prior issues… have they been addressed?

- Adding an approach on arrival had the plane doing a u-turn to some user waypoint (both the Garmin 1000 and FBW 320)

- FBW 320 could not do RNAV - no glide down - it would just fly over the runway at your last set elevation

- ATC often gave conflicting, dangerous, or impossible altitude assignments requiring it be ignored most of the time.

In addition, back when I gave up, LoD was pretty bad, and if you turned it up by editing a config file, it killed performance. It was also CPU single thread constrained, barely using the GPU or other cores in the system. I could only get 30-40FPS on a 5800/3090 setup. Has the performance improved at all? Did the DX12 port ever happen? What was the result?

Using payware airplanes is a much better option if you want to plan and execute IFR flights. The "live" weather feature will get better. ATC & AI improvements will eventually come.

I prefer to create a flight in LNM and load into MSFS and just go fly the full IFR flight with default ATC instructions. It does a great job about 98% of the time.

SI 10 will bring better DX12 support. Right now NO.

46 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

One other question… is there a way to review your landing from different external angles after you’ve parked?  

No. Yet, it's still my sim of choice for VFR/IFR flights. Just awesome!

1 hour ago, Virtual-Chris said:

I’m not interested in hauling my cockpit out of storage unless I can get confirmation that some of the serious IFR issues have been addressed in the last 18 months. If this isn’t the right topic, I’m happy to start another one. 

WT has been working on IFR issues for several SU releases and are fixing things bit by bit.  It will depend on which avionics set you are using.  The G1000NXi is quite good now.

You can go into dev mode and turn on the flight recorder and review your landings. 

The best G1000 in all flight simming history now exists. No the weird point stuff doesn’t happen and hasn’t for well over a year  

The FBW A320 is vastly improved and you can get the absolute best A320 as confirmed by professional pilots if you spend $50 USD on the Fenix.

Night lighting is best in simming history  

As far as I know MSFS forum members prefer the flight model and think it’s vastly improved.  XP forum members think it’s terrible. P3D users also don’t like it. People getting their PPL vastly prefer real airplane flight models. No professional studies have been done to conclude which is better. 

Weather is brilliant and the best in simming history.  However it doesn’t always match every square inch of the earth with 100% accuracy. I had my wife outside with a wind gauge and the sim was off by at least 2-3knts. I also counted 47 clouds and the sim had something like 34.

Loading times are way faster. 

Default ATC is still terrible but all the programs that fix ATC in other sims work great in MSFS as well as VATSim. They do intend to rework it someday in the future. 

Now go get that cockpit out of storage!
 

 

3 hours ago, TravelRunner404 said:

You can go into dev mode and turn on the flight recorder and review your landings. 

The best G1000 in all flight simming history now exists. No the weird point stuff doesn’t happen and hasn’t for well over a year  

The FBW A320 is vastly improved and you can get the absolute best A320 as confirmed by professional pilots if you spend $50 USD on the Fenix.

Night lighting is best in simming history  

As far as I know MSFS forum members prefer the flight model and think it’s vastly improved.  XP forum members think it’s terrible. P3D users also don’t like it. People getting their PPL vastly prefer real airplane flight models. No professional studies have been done to conclude which is better. 

Weather is brilliant and the best in simming history.  However it doesn’t always match every square inch of the earth with 100% accuracy. I had my wife outside with a wind gauge and the sim was off by at least 2-3knts. I also counted 47 clouds and the sim had something like 34.

Loading times are way faster. 

Default ATC is still terrible but all the programs that fix ATC in other sims work great in MSFS as well as VATSim. They do intend to rework it someday in the future. 

Now go get that cockpit out of storage!
 

 

Thanks for the great rundown. 
 

It’s sad that after 2 years, in-game ATC is still so poor. It’s such a critical part of flight, especially IFR. I guess it’s still very much a VFR game/sim. Is Pilot2ATC still one of the better ATC solutions?

Edited July 20, 20223 yr by Virtual-Chris