20 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Depends on the size of the rock

 

handily, this included in the video 😁

Missing:

1. Much further distance for LoD render radius
2. Correct shadow processing (again way too short a radius)
3. A good controller UI
4. A good marketplace UI

1 and 2 are performance hogs but VERY easy to implement, but let the user decide what's important.  Open up the radius for PC performance high end crowd and stop pandering to the "my PC can't do that so nobody else should be allow to" crowd.

With that said, MSFS 2024 + Orbx scenery is frankly outstanding, GB south, central, north with SSAA (aka TAA = 200) is extremely well rendered.

4 hours ago, BrammyH said:

Resolving the VRAM issues. Sure, I have a 3060ti, but even with all settings on low performance is horrid. I am tired of incanting dark arts to try and resolve this.

Good luck with that ... VRAM is your friend and that will not change without significant degradation of image quality.  Your choice is a better GPU with more VRAM but no dark arts will help if you don't have the VRAM. 

If nVidia 5090 is out of your budget, go for AMD 7900XTX 24GB or nVidia 4090 24GB.  But there is hope for more cost effective solutions coming soon from AMD with the UDNA 10000 series GPUs and 32GB VRAM.

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Depends on the size of the rock, slope of the rock, speed of the plane, etc.  Having said that, of course a simulator can't simulate everything perfectly. But the fact that MSFS 2024 simulates this is amazing.

It's a first for a flight simulator, no other flight simulator does this, for default scenery. This puts MSFS 2024 miles and miles ahead of the rest of the flight simulators.

I'm talking about the rock in the video. There's not even a debate.

You could even add some still-wet edible seaweed that fell from a cargo plane for next time...

Interesting read. I'm curious why there's no mention of being able to set a specific visibility value, or RVR, in that way. The approach plates specify that conducting certain procedures is a requirement (restriction). For example, in the LEVEL D simulator, we practice t.o. minimums of 500, 500, 500 RVR, CAT I, II, III ILS approaches with their respective visibility values, instrument approaches to minimums, and circle-to-land procedures with visibility requirements, among other things.

This feature is essential for a "flight simulation," yet it is not mentioned. It was absent in MSFS2020 and MSFS2024.

Edited May 29, 20251 yr by LRBS

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

stop pandering to the "my PC can't do that so nobody else should be allow to" crowd.

I don't think such people exist

5 hours ago, LRBS said:

This feature is essential for a "flight simulation," yet it is not mentioned. It was absent in MSFS2020 and MSFS2024.

Likely because very few people simulate this way...

11 minutes ago, Cognita said:

Likely because very few people simulate this way...

It's interesting that all the simulators—FSX, P3D, XP11-12, and even the old MSFS—had a slider or a value to adjust visibility for simulating correct weather conditions or minimums required for an approach, enhancing immersion. That’s not the case anymore. I guess eye candy has taken precedence over functionality. 

8 minutes ago, LRBS said:

t's interesting that all the simulators—FSX, P3D, XP11-12, and even the old MSFS—had a slider or a value to adjust visibility

That is true. It is I agree quite a glaring omission. I just note that very few people actually draw attention to it, of all the  "bugs" and missing features this one only comes up from time to time and usually does not get much attention.

52 minutes ago, Cognita said:

That is true. It is I agree quite a glaring omission. I just note that very few people actually draw attention to it, of all the  "bugs" and missing features this one only comes up from time to time and usually does not get much attention.

This is probably wider than the scope of this thread.

I was under the impression that a simple "visibility" slider is not entirely realistic but more of a 'sim-ism' back when clouds were 2D.

Instead you simulate haze, fog, and low cloud by adding layers and tweaking coverage and density values to get the desired visibility. I've just tried it in sim and seems to work well. 

Would appreciate if you could expand on the benefits of a standalone visibility slider, genuinely just so I understand what it is we are missing currently.

10 hours ago, filou said:

In reality, the plane would have been stopped. Ridiculous as an example.Paper airplane physics.

That first rock would have straight up broke something.

 

10 hours ago, filou said:

I'm talking about the rock in the video. There's not even a debate.

You could even add some still-wet edible seaweed that fell from a cargo plane for next time...

I think you're missing the bigger picture here.  The first computer flight simulator (some people say Sublogic for Apple 2) hardly had realistic flight dynamics and weather - it was far from perfect. I can see you would be the type of person to criticize the Sublogic flight simulator back in 1980 for having poor flight dynamics and poor weather because that's the type of person you are. However, it was a breakthrough at its time, and led to the flight simulation industry of today.  So the way the planes interact with rocks and boulders in MSFS 2024 isn't perfect, but IMO, it's decent for a first try.

MSFS 2024 now models the behavior of planes interacting with rocks and boulders across the entire world, something that no other flight simulator does. If you don't want a more realistic world being simulated, that's you.  I prefer a more realistic world being simulated, even if the first attempt at simulating it isn't perfect.   If you are using another flight simulator now that isn't MSFS 2024, without custom scenery, the planes in your world don't interact with the rocks and boulders across the world (because your simulator's world just doesn't have them), making it much less realistic for ground physics. That's your choice. 

How is a world without rocks and boulders realistic anyways - that's an unrealistic world with a huge omission!  But I prefer the world of my flight simulator, to have rocks and boulders that the plane can interact with, even if the simulation is not perfect (but overall, it's pretty decent in MSFS 2024).

Edited May 30, 20251 yr by abrams_tank

20 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

Do you want me to ask Gary about that? I have not seen any other reports about UK2000 airports not working in MSFS 2024. Gary has updated all of his airports for MSFS 2024 compatibility, so Flagstaff certainly should work. What happens when you try to load it? Does it freeze during the loading process? Does it CTD?

It works fine as does KSNA.  The problem was that it was not loading. It would just stay stuck on that view of the airport from above.  I finally solved it by turning off AI aircraft entirely. Now both UK2000 sceneries are loading as well as all Pacsim Sceneries.  Dominic Designs newer seceneries are fine. And Bullfrogs scenries are working now.  My problem has always been getting stuck on the top down view when hitting fly now. I guess 400MBp/s is just not enough for this data hog.   I need a T1 line or some other 1GB+ fiber cable internet.

11 hours ago, LRBS said:

Interesting read. I'm curious why there's no mention of being able to set a specific visibility value, or RVR, in that way.

Probably because the thread is aimed at what's in MSFS2020 that isn't in MSFS2024, rather than what's missing in general.

6 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I think you're missing the bigger picture here.  The first computer flight simulator (some people say Sublogic for Apple 2) hardly had realistic flight dynamics and weather - it was far from perfect. I can see you would be the type of person to criticize the Sublogic flight simulator back in 1980 for having poor flight dynamics and poor weather because that's the type of person you are. However, it was a breakthrough at its time, and led to the flight simulation industry of today.  So the way the planes interact with rocks and boulders in MSFS 2024 isn't perfect, but IMO, it's decent for a first try.

MSFS 2024 now models the behavior of planes interacting with rocks and boulders across the entire world, something that no other flight simulator does. If you don't want a more realistic world being simulated, that's you.  I prefer a more realistic world being simulated, even if the first attempt at simulating it isn't perfect.   If you are using another flight simulator now that isn't MSFS 2024, without custom scenery, the planes in your world don't interact with the rocks and boulders across the world (because your simulator's world just doesn't have them), making it much less realistic for ground physics. That's your choice. 

How is a world without rocks and boulders realistic anyways - that's an unrealistic world with a huge omission!  But I prefer the world of my flight simulator, to have rocks and boulders that the plane can interact with, even if the simulation is not perfect (but overall, it's pretty decent in MSFS 2024).

I prefer an airplane that doesn't interact with the ground than an absurd resemblance. It's especially very badly done.Throwing a paper airplane at a rock will be 100 times more realistic.