7 hours ago, AnkH said:

Which is, not surprisingly, just some hours later proven by the last Dev Live Stream... "Disappearing landing gear on AI aircraft is generally caused by the individual aircraft’s LOD configuration and should be reported per aircraft."

They simply do not get it... NO it is NOT caues by the individual aicrafts LOD configuration. Geez, how many times this need to be repeated over and over again until their stubborn approach to this issue is overwhelmed? @SeedyL we absolutely need your support here. We had once a short discussion about things being said or not, but as you can see in this Dev Live Stream it is pretty obvious that Asobo thinks the issue is not on their side. BUT IT IS for gods sake. What does it need that this is finally addressed? I seriously will loose my temper soon, how can one be so word not allowed, stubborn and obviously wrong even if you are told a million times that it IS NOT how you think? Really...

Or another approach for us customers? We report every single AI plane with the issue via Zendesk? Means all default AI planes, all FSLTL AI planes and all AIG AI planes? Maybe a whopping list of about 500 AI planes being reported "per aircraft" via Zendesk will finally ring a bell over there? Sadly I doubt...

EDIT: just rewatched the stream on YT and seriously, I cant take them for granted anymore. You can CLEARLY see at Sebs reaction that he obviously hears for the first time about LOD issues with AI traffic, he starts stumbling around and then gives above explanation. What the heck, how is it possible that he has obviously no clue about what the question is? Cant believe this, seriously... (YT video mark: from minute 28:00 on, you do not need to be a psychologist to properly judge Sebs reaction on the question about AI LOD issues): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV75LL7duI0

When he said "what type of traffic".

Me: 🤦🤦🤦🤦

8 minutes ago, simsuper80 said:

When he said "what type of traffic".

Me: 🤦🤦🤦🤦

Agree, this was embarrassing. Really, he had no clue what the question was all about. Which basically speaks for itself. Enough said...

14 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Agree, this was embarrassing. Really, he had no clue what the question was all about. Which basically speaks for itself. Enough said...

Someone was able to make a taxi cam work in the sim (it's early, so there are bugs).

But hopefully it's possible in this case. Maybe some 3rd party will have to find a way. Idk🤷.

5 hours ago, AnkH said:

I am really pretty sure they simply do not get the point. Maybe they think we are complaining about the sometimes appearing LOD issues with AI planes, where e.g. the AIG planes then show as simple rectangular like models instead of the full LOD? Who knows, maybe Chewwy should have emphasized the culling issue instead of talking about LODs only? I do not know, it is just another example of how difficult it can be if the contact is only indirect via Ticketsystem and forum manager. Lost in translation is the other aspect. As I am capable of speaking french, I would love to sit once on a table with Seb and Martial for 30min, I could explain them a lot more directly. Such a exchange with the community in a direct manner might resolve some discrepancies pretty quick...

If Only Microsoft/Asobo were coming to the UK Flightsim Show. I would be able to explain it to them...........

Ini's A300 PAX, A340 PAX/VIP, and A350 Full Cabin won't load in the beta, just stuck on the map screen forever.

the A350 No Cabin and the A340 Freighter load fine.

I forgot to test the A300 Freighter before switching back to SU6.

Edited Thursday at 06:39 PM5 days by Tuskin38

On 9/15/2026 at 9:00 AM, lwt1971 said:

But how do you know it's "by design" though?

Because that's what primitive "optimization" is, culling (render less = higher FPS and less VRAM usage). It's "By Design" because Asobo (the source) provided the details on how and why the "optimization" exists ... I highly recommend you read several of links others and myself have posted in the official MSFS 2024 forums covering the culling "optimization". It answers your questions and you'll understand why it was done without going down conspiracy road.

Asobo have NOT acknowledged this issue as a "bug", as above, it falls under "optimization" which is "by design". Again, if you look at MSFS 2024 intro video, you can see the AI aircraft wondering around without nose wheels and landing gear ... the issue was present in MSFS 2020 but no as obvious as it is in MSFS 2024. 6 years later and Asobo have NOT acknowledge this is a bug so as I suggested, don't hold your breath this will get "fixed".

This is NOT a LOD issue, it's a late render culling calculation based on % of screen size, if an object falls below that percent threshold, it doesn't get rendered regardless of LOD. Creating huge invisible bounding boxes doesn't help either. It's a very primitive culling process.

On 9/15/2026 at 8:54 AM, Christopher Low said:

Do MS/Asobo seriously think like that? Why can't the simulator look better on PC than XBox or PS5?

I would say it's really about performance, XBOX and PS5 hardware needs all the help it can get and aggressive culling is one way to improve performance ... perhaps not "look better" and more "works better" but it triggers the same comparison which I doubt Asobo want to deal with.

On 9/15/2026 at 9:22 AM, simsuper80 said:

So they cannot separate or isolate the two?

More like they don't want to ... I can't imagine a Beta tester internal to Asobo didn't notice the missing landing, I mean you can see the missing landing gear problem in MSFS 2024 intro video ... I know the developers are not blind soooo ...

On 9/15/2026 at 10:54 AM, UrgentSiesta said:

I don’t believe it’s “by design”, though. It seems very much like a side effect of something else to which gear visibility is tied.

Is it possible that gear have no LoDs of their own, and so get culled earlier than they should…?

We really need to stop regurgitating this because it only adds to urban myth. It's not a LOD issue, every aircraft (3rd party and MSFS) has this problem. Asobo said the culling is a % of screen size, late render or early (I would think early), no amount of LOD will help, no huge invisible bounding boxes help ... it's by design.

Edited Saturday at 05:56 AM4 days by SayAgain

21 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

Because that's what primitive "optimization" is, culling (render less = higher FPS and less VRAM usage). It's "By Design" because Asobo (the source) provided the details on how and why the "optimization" exists ... I highly recommend you read several of links others and myself have posted in the official MSFS 2024 forums covering the culling "optimization". It answers your questions and you'll understand why it was done without going down conspiracy road.

Asobo have NOT acknowledged this issue as a "bug", as above, it falls under "optimization" which is "by design". Again, if you look at MSFS 2024 intro video, you can see the AI aircraft wondering around without nose wheels and landing gear ... the issue was present in MSFS 2020 but no as obvious as it is in MSFS 2024. 6 years later and Asobo have NOT acknowledge this is a bug so as I suggested, don't hold your breath this will get "fixed".

This is NOT a LOD issue, it's a late render culling calculation based on % of screen size, if an object falls below that percent threshold, it doesn't get rendered regardless of LOD. Creating huge invisible bounding boxes doesn't help either. It's a very primitive culling process.

Well... I'm always going to call that a bug, (not directing this at you btw LOL) and I'm sure I won't be alone. The previous generation of simulators never had this problem. It's very unfortunate that the Xbox and PS5 versions have to ruin the experience for P.C users. They should be separated, but oh well.

Edited Saturday at 05:49 AM4 days by simsuper80

On 9/17/2026 at 7:51 AM, AnkH said:

Agree, this was embarrassing. Really, he had no clue what the question was all about. Which basically speaks for itself. Enough said...

Yeah ... the dilution of information thru urban legend.

I mean, when @SeedyL told me the floating aircraft without landing gear in the MSFS 2024 intro was due to an "pre-release Alpha-build" and not present in released MSFS 2024 is when I fired up XP12 and started using it as my primary sim ... clearly going NO WHERE with this guy and the latest live stream is yet more of the same ignorance chasing the problem as if it's a LOD issue and not a core render culling issue.

What puzzles me, Asobo actually communicated the "% of screen size" culling ... so why are they deflecting this topic over and over.

Edited Saturday at 05:55 AM4 days by SayAgain

1 minute ago, SayAgain said:

Yeah ... the dilution of information thru urban legend.

I mean, when @SeedyL told me the floating aircraft without landing gear in the MSFS 2024 intro was due to an "pre-release Alpha-build" and not present in released MSFS 2024 is when I fired up XP12 and started my using it as my primary sim ... clearly going NO WHERE with this guy and the latest live stream is yet more of the same ignorance chasing the problem as it it's a LOD issue and not a core render culling issue.

What puzzles me, Asobo actually communicated the "% of screen size" culling ... so why are they deflecting this top over and over.

If it's the % of screen size. Would lowering the screen resolution change the distance that the landing gear disappear? Probably not right?

1 minute ago, simsuper80 said:

Well... I'm always going to call that a bug

Fair enough, but culling is commonly used in most games/simulation, just handled different (P3D did it, FSX did it, XP does it) ... it's just the way Asobo are handling it is in it's most simple form "% of screen size". But I agree, there are a lot of "By Design" implementations that I would consider as bugs and I've been coding for 47 years and finally now retired.

Edited Saturday at 05:53 AM4 days by SayAgain

20 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

Fair enough, but culling is commonly used in most games/simulation, just handled different (P3D did it, FSX did it, XP does it) ... it's just the way Asobo are handling it is in it's most simple form "% of screen size". But I agree, there are a lot of "By Design" implementations that I would consider as bugs and I've been coding for 47 years and finally now retired.

I mentioned this before, but what about those who fly online? If you're told to report traffic in sight, you can't see the traffic because the sim doesn't render aircraft that far out.

Sometimes I'll see 2 clear contrails but no aircraft.

10 minutes ago, simsuper80 said:

Would lowering the screen resolution change the distance that the landing gear disappear?

Not really, aspect ratio might adjust it a little. If it's done early in the render pipeline (which is what I would expect), DLSS, FG, SSAA, TAA etc. shouldn't have any influence ... I've tested with various settings/resolutions and didn't really notice any variance in the culling.

I haven't tried DLSS 5 yet (OptiScaler and replacing DXGI) but I doubt that would make any difference but I guess technically it could but that's happening much later in the pipeline (not at the primitive level).