FSHud 1.3. Beta Wow!!!!

[RALF9636 1,966]

15 minutes ago, snwboardn said:

I use symbolic links in my community folder, not sure if this is causing issues?

That does not cause issues for me, I'm using Addons Linker.

Quote

 

Haha, hope you find my feedback somewhat funny. 

I did. 😄

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by RALF9636

[phildem 0]

Just WOW!I just fell in love with FSHUD v1.3 beta.Game changer for me.Good fps overall with latest version.Can't do without Fshud now!

[Tony P 160]

Anyone know if AI Flow or AI Ground are needed still or does FSHud and FSLTL good on their own?

[doublem 20]

3 hours ago, Tony P said:

Anyone know if AI Flow or AI Ground are needed still or does FSHud and FSLTL good on their own?

I never used AI F/G but I say that FSHud/FSLTL do a great job. 

FSHud is improving alomst daily right now in the beta 1.3.*.

I really love this combo. 

[FSHud 212]

5 hours ago, Tony P said:

Anyone know if AI Flow or AI Ground are needed still or does FSHud and FSLTL good on their own?

AI Flow and AI Ground affects on MSFS AI controlling and piloting engine.
While FSHud is completely separated AI Controlling and piloting engine - those two add-ons are not relevant for FSHud, because things are working completely different.

[threexgreen 3,139]

Does FSHud simulate oceanic airspace, clearances and position reports etc.?

[gabriel122 23]

20 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

Does FSHud simulate oceanic airspace, clearances and position reports etc.?

PF3 has trans-ocean air control feature

[threexgreen 3,139]

1 minute ago, gabriel122 said:

PF3 has trans-ocean air control feature

That's why I'm asking if FSHud has it. 

[FSHud 212]

2 hours ago, Nixoq said:

Does FSHud simulate oceanic airspace, clearances and position reports etc.?

No, it doesn't - but contained in future plans like many other features.

Besides that - (just personal opinion) - how many of us are sitting 5 hours and more and performing trans-oceanic flight?
Well, if it's more than 50% of users, I think I'm missing something and this feature could be prioritized.
But I think it's much less important than separation for example, or holding patters or even all management around proceed to alternative airport.

But even more thinking of FSHud approach to Trans-Oceanic routes support - it has to be supported for AI Traffic as well (as every feature).
The purpose of Trans-Oceanic procedures - to separate traffic - as most of ATC procedures.
I don't think any of ATC program or simulators simulates it on that level.

While it was mentioned previously - we are not interested to spend time in "Bring me a coffee chat program feature" when those procedures just exist
as "conversation flow without any real basement behind it".

Another ATC programs "support" it - based on what criteria they allocate it?
Because there is link to Oceanic Procedures that completely talks about Traffic Separation, which is fundamental factor of all of that:
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html/chap_8.html

To simplify it - for better understanding:
Identical feature that is provided by another ATC programs is "Reduce speed to XXX knots" ATC instruction - where the same question asked again:
According what basement and criteria this instruction were issued?
Besides the fact that user aircraft is faster than expected in procedure - and even this rule can be broken with "No speed restrictions" if there
is no real basement for such limitation of speed.

In real world, such instructions are issued for Traffic Separation only - otherwise, it's much more economical and better for all to give instruction of
"No speed restrictions" which frequently happens if none of traffic is expected in the area.

I think we (FSHud team) need to organize some kind of statistics polls about what flights and areas are more and less popular - because with
all respect - success of the project is mostly depends on correct development effort in important features.

Thank you

[Langeveldt 281]

I've been trying to work out why I get a stutter fest with a reasonable machine and only 15 ground and 15 aircraft, whereas everyone else is getting good FPS.  I had to cancel another flight from the UK to Poland once I got near London.

Is there any way to lower the radius that FSHud tries to display and control AI traffic? 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Langeveldt

[FSHud 212]

37 minutes ago, Langeveldt said:

I've been trying to work out why I get a stutter fest with a reasonable machine and only 15 ground and 15 aircraft, whereas everyone else is getting good FPS.  I had to cancel another flight from the UK to Poland once I got near London.

Is there any way to lower the radius that FSHud tries to display and control AI traffic? 

First of all - let's clarify what version you're using.
Also, please report such information via application tickets - it doesn't make sense to talk about it here with zero information
about what is going on on your environment.
Somethin that I think I've mentioned to you previously.

[threexgreen 3,139]

3 hours ago, FSHud said:

No, it doesn't - but contained in future plans like many other features.

[...]

You don't have to justify why it's not a feature, it was just a question.

You're right in that separation is a big part of oceanic procedures, but ORCA is also about being outside of radar coverage and VHF range, having to switch to HF, conducting HF and SELCAL checks with ATC, dropping position reports, comparing waypoint ETAs to inform ATC of discrepancies to correct in order to ensure separation, etc. ORCA also doesn't only apply to long hauls crossing the big pond, I just flew a 1h40 flight through class II airspace (through PF3 which admittedly was a rather lacking experience) from Newark to Bermuda. Crossing the Gulf of Mexico on a 1h30-ish flight from Houston to Cancún for example also involves class II navigation.

I don't really get the argumentation to be honest, when it comes to separation this really is pretty much the same principle as separating aircraft on approach; assign speeds to maintain that separation. Given FSHud does this based on actual traffic movements there is no reason to ask for what the base behind a speed assignment in oceanic airspace is, because it's the same as why FSHud assign speeds on approach. In fact, given FSHud controls traffic this really is the only ATC program where oceanic separation and position reports actually make sense. Imagine getting a mach number assigned based on the AI aircraft in front of you in class II airspace, how cool would that be.

That said, it really was just a question whether it does or doesn't simulate it since FSHud actually controls traffic and separation. If it's coming later that's fine. I'm about to pull the trigger on FSHud, btw, since this thread has convinced me of it delivering more than other ATC programs I've used.

Edited April 27, 2023 by Nixoq
Truncated quote

[MarioDonick 752]

How can I get the beta? I purchased FSHud a few weeks ago, is there anywhere a beta option?

[regis9 4,014]

When I do a trans-oceanic flights I’m normally getting up and leaving the sim to run for hours, so I’d be looking for ATC options that enable me to do that.

[threexgreen 3,139]

13 minutes ago, regis9 said:

When I do a trans-oceanic flights I’m normally getting up and leaving the sim to run for hours, so I’d be looking for ATC options that enable me to do that.

I'd so the same on a long haul, but again, ORCA isn't just long hauls but medium haul as well. Since there is a virtual F/O handling all the comm stuff you could just let him do that and do something else away from the PC.