FSHud 1.3. Beta Wow!!!!

[anden145 2,285]

13 hours ago, Nixoq said:

How often does this occur? Because if it constantly deviates from the planned route it's not realistic either. It should have good reasons to deviate, like a significant change in wind, but otherwise follow the planned route.

Some general questions to everyone: Is there a way to designate preferred runways to comply with real world procedures as much as possible? E.g. landing and taking off on the 24s and 25s at LAX even with a slight tailwind or to ignore a runway that is virtually never used IRL?

If I set my F/O to handle all comms and radio ops, can I pretty much forget about the menu and fly in VR even if it doesn't yet fully support VR?

Does FSHud request random traffic from FSLTL or does FSLTL still inject live traffic based on FR24 with FSHud taking over managing that traffic?

In short - no. At least I haven't found a way... It would be nice, if there were some way of setting such things up (simple custom configurations) inside the UI. I started for instance at EKCH, and FSHud insisted on giving AI traffic (and myself) take-off on runway 22L and landing 22R - have NO idea how arrived on that setup, though. In real-life, it's the oposite. R-runways are used for takeoff (22R and 04R depending on wind) and L-runways are used for landing (22L and 04L). It also used 12/30 a few times, which is almost never done IRL, unless there's heavy winds favoring that specific direction.

Yes, yes, I know that you can 'just' change the desired runway manually inside FSHud by changing the routing - but it kinda breaks the immersion, when you're the only plane doing it. 

[HighTowers 1,436]

That has always been a significant problem with ATC software.    I have mentioned this before from previous software, but was never rectified.  Airports have default operations as in wind 5-7kts or less.  Problem with ATC software, reading a wind with 1-2 kts changes runways when its not necessary.  Should be kept to default ops.   There is probably an issue that needs to have a database to read somewhere to tell the ATC software exactly what default ops are, which runways are in use at this time of day with winds less than the 5-7kts.  Dont think Navigraph has this implemented. 

[MaximeLB 1]

I've been playing around with the beta and especially the latest version 1.3.51 which is very good at injecting AI traffic from FSTLT. I noticed that the static traffic (default 50) creates a big CPU demand and causes stutters in big airports. I notice that Taxi lights are on for static aircraft which has an impact on FPS. Setting the slider to 0 reduces all my stuttering problems even with 20-40 airborne planes.

This causes other problems: no static planes in the airports and no departures, only landings. While waiting for an improvement of the program by FSHUD, I use the following trick:

I duplicated the FSTLT injector folder to another location and renamed it "static airfract.exe".

The parameters for the injector are :
- IFR traffic = 5
- VFR traffic = 0
- Static aircraft = 4

I then launch the software in this order:
-Static aircraft.exe (It does not recognize FSHUD and interacts directly with MSFS engine)
-FSHUD.exe
-MSFS.exe
-FSTLT Injector.exe in the lobby (Recognize FSHUD and inject aircraft for FSHUD)

All these programs can be started automatically with Addon linker for example.

Under these conditions, the airports are full of static aircraft and 3 to 5 aircraft managed by the MSFS engine take off from the airports (but not controlled by FSHUD). For the rest everything is controlled by FSHUD and this trick allows me to totally reduce my stutters and CPU demand.
 

[techman 174]

The stutter happens only during injection, not when the traffic is injected and active. At least for me (13900K/4080 though).

[RALF9636 1,983]

8 hours ago, anden145 said:

 FSHud insisted on giving AI traffic (and myself) take-off on runway 22L and landing 22R - have NO idea how arrived on that setup, though. In real-life, it's the oposite. R-runways are used for takeoff (22R and 04R depending on wind) and L-runways are used for landing (22L and 04L). 

 

6 hours ago, HighTowers said:

There is probably an issue that needs to have a database to read somewhere to tell the ATC software exactly what default ops are, which runways are in use at this time of day with winds less than the 5-7kts.  Dont think Navigraph has this implemented. 

 

From the FSHud announcement:

 

Quote

 

Version 1.3 development - what to expect

3. Improved, more realistic runway selection according to the airport environment.
For example - at KLAX,  runways 24R/06L and 25L/07R would always be used for landings, and 24L/06R and 25R/07L for takeoffs.

 

 

So I guess FSHud wants to build their own database for this. Obviously work in progress and will take time to cover airports worldwide.

 

[Benbo 53]

Is there a way to stop FSHud allocating Runways 26R and 08L for arrivals and departure at EGKK,those runways are not in use IRL.

[anden145 2,285]

3 minutes ago, Benbo said:

Is there a way to stop FSHud allocating Runways 26R and 08L for arrivals and departure at EGKK,those runways are not in use IRL.

I don't think so...

[HighTowers 1,436]

1 hour ago, RALF9636 said:

 

 

From the FSHud announcement:

 

 

So I guess FSHud wants to build their own database for this. Obviously work in progress and will take time to cover airports worldwide.

 

Cool. Step in the right direction. Perhaps we could get clarification what 'Airport Environment' entails. The wind direction AND speed?   Default Ops?  What happens when the wind changes direction to a more accommodating runway but the wind speed is only 3kts.  Then default ops still remain.  If software somehow takes this into consideration, then it would a big step towards real world ops.   Wind over 7kts is clear.  

[threexgreen 3,152]

22 hours ago, rob0203 said:

Now FSHud is assigning runways based on actual weather / wind change, if you want another runway or STAR you can request that immediately after you are cleared for the STAR or approach procedure.

Thanks! Can you still request a different runway after your F/O has read back the clearance already?

 

12 hours ago, anden145 said:

In short - no. At least I haven't found a way... It would be nice, if there were some way of setting such things up (simple custom configurations) inside the UI. I started for instance at EKCH, and FSHud insisted on giving AI traffic (and myself) take-off on runway 22L and landing 22R - have NO idea how arrived on that setup, though. In real-life, it's the oposite. R-runways are used for takeoff (22R and 04R depending on wind) and L-runways are used for landing (22L and 04L). It also used 12/30 a few times, which is almost never done IRL, unless there's heavy winds favoring that specific direction.

That's what I like about PF3 where you can close runways completely or designate them takeoff or landing only or both in a specific menu. This should be rather easy to do too since FSHud knows the runways for every airport from Navigraph data and it could build a file that saves the user's configuration so to simply mark a runway as closed, landing or takeoff or both. @FSHud

[anden145 2,285]

10 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

That's what I like about PF3 where you can close runways completely or designate them takeoff or landing only or both in a specific menu. This should be rather easy to do too since FSHud knows the runways for every airport from Navigraph data and it could build a file that saves the user's configuration so to simply mark a runway as closed, landing or takeoff or both. @FSHud

Indeed yes. It would be nice, it something could be made, which had the option of being community-driven (or community-customed). Either something like PF3 has done or GSX Pro, with .ini files or similar files, which could be exported and shared. Otherwise it's simply going to take ages (no offense, FSHud!) to cover all (or majority) or the airports.

[threexgreen 3,152]

1 minute ago, anden145 said:

Indeed yes. It would be nice, it something could be made, which had the option of being community-driven (or community-customed). Either something like PF3 has done or GSX Pro, with .ini files or similar files, which could be exported and shared. Otherwise it's simply going to take ages (no offense, FSHud!) to cover all (or majority) or the airports.

The idea about sharing config files is good, but it doesn't even need to have any shipped configs. All you would do yourself is open a menu, select a runway to close and another to takeoff only and off you go. That takes a few seconds, so I don't think FSHud would need to do any of that, just make the option available.

[FSHud 215]

47 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

Thanks! Can you still request a different runway after your F/O has read back the clearance already?

 

That's what I like about PF3 where you can close runways completely or designate them takeoff or landing only or both in a specific menu. This should be rather easy to do too since FSHud knows the runways for every airport from Navigraph data and it could build a file that saves the user's configuration so to simply mark a runway as closed, landing or takeoff or both. @FSHud

In PF3 - closing the runways also affect on AI Traffic?

[Langeveldt 285]

8 hours ago, techman said:

The stutter happens only during injection, not when the traffic is injected and active. At least for me (13900K/4080 though).

I had to cancel a flight last night, takeoff EGTE and 25 FPS with 15 ground and 15 airbone aircraft, which is a lot less than I'd like FPS wise, but for such a good piece of software I was willing to stomach it.  Then on overflying Brussels and a fairly big airport things completely ground to a halt, I was only getting about 1-2 FPS and had to cancel.  Using FSLTL injection.

When I use the FSLTL injector on its own with 15 ground and 15 airborne I get a fairly solid 30FPS throughout no matter where I fly. 

In terms of more feedback, I always get cleared to FL260 and told to fly runway heading, then abandoned unless I turn myself to my track, when taking off at EGTE, but nowhere else (that I've flown)

[rob0203 697]

1 hour ago, FSHud said:

In PF3 - closing the runways also affect on AI Traffic?

Also I like the simplicity and intuitivity of the FSHud menu system, please keep it like this!

Please don't add 100 options like some other Atc software!
 

[Darcy 63]

If there was just a way to reduce the cpu usage in the larger airports this would be perfect.  Beta is better than 1.246 but fps in airports drops like a rock.  This is with FSLTL: 25 static and 15 active.  Unchecking eternal and everything goes back up.  I am told by developers that this is an asobo problem.  But it does make it unusable in large airports though (at least for me).  Too bad because I really like this ATC.  Hopefully they can come up with work around.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Darcy