2 hours ago, Farlis said:

He is totally correct. I use the AIG packages and almost none of the included aircraft suffer the problem. But a few select ones do very much. It's particularly bad with the 787.

Come on. Let's not be silly. I only use the AIG planes and flightplans, and basically all of the aircraft suffer from the disappearing AI landing gear issue to a greater or lesser extent. I have not seen a single model that does not suffer from it.

Edited September 17Sep 17 by Christopher Low

Just now, Christopher Low said:

Come on. Let's not be silly. I only use the AIG planes and flightplans, and basically all of the aircraft suffer from the disappearing AI landing gear issue to a greater or lesser extent.

But the distance at which it happens is usually acceptable an only glaringly obvious with a couple of models.

I totally disagree. If I can see the wheels disappear from view (and the plane floating in the air), then it is too close. All of the AIG models exhibit this on my PC. I only have a 24" monitor, so I can only imagine how much worse it looks on the much larger monitors that some of you guys have.

I'm using IVAO MTL with a 3440x1440 screen and have AI planes floating.

52 minutes ago, Farlis said:

But the distance at which it happens is usually acceptable an only glaringly obvious with a couple of models.

It is not. There should be no culling at all. A sim more than 20y ago did not have this issue, so nobody can tell that is has serious performance considerations behind. And I am pretty word not allowed sure (although I can not proof it anymore), that at a certain stage, MSFS2020 did not suffer from this and also 2024 had it less pronounced in earlier builds.

Anyway, it seems that FSLTL and AIG are working on workarounds to get around this culling issue (something with fake geometry preventing the culling if I got the post right). Means: once again we are fully dependent on 3rd party solution. Perfectly fine for me in the end

As far as I can remember, MSFS 2020 exhibited the same problem from when I started using it, which was November 2023. Of course, that was three years after release, so it could have been different prior to that.

17 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

Better FPS and Performance: at a HUGE cost of downgrading visuals. This is what has been happening and it's terrible. We know how LODs work (maybe some don't) but they didn't mention that they've killed the distances server side. 400 used to be 400 and now its like 200 at best, even though it's still labeled 400 in the GUI.

They mention more optimizations in SU7 beta and beyond. I'm not interested in running a FSX-looking sim in the year 2026. I don't want better FPS with less visuals!

I understand console is why there IS a sim. But why in the world should me and my 4000 USD system be penalized because someone running an Xbox from 6-8 years ago can't run it at the same quality? A 4000 PC and a 600 USD xbox will NEVER look the same (now it's more like 7000 USD and 1500 USD thanks to AI.... sigh). People have too high of expectations.

We need totally separate GUI for consoles and PC. Or they need a way to grey out high end options for consoles.

EDIT: I stood by MSFS 2024 upon release, but right now its severely downgraded visuals are a MAJOR issue. XP12, which I've flown quite a bit in the last week, looks FAR better for scenery (freeware XPME), clouds, atmosphere than 2024 is currently at. Anti aliasing has been improved but it's not quite as nice as TAA or DLAA in 2024. There's just a major lack of addons in XP12 - it's really why I stay in 2024. But at the rate of killing off visuals in 2024, I can't say I'm going to support 2024 moving forward.

EDIT v2: But then the Praetor... DANG IT... I'll have to stay for the Praetor...looks in depth!

This is EXACTLY how I feel. Seb's 'lecture' on LODs is not what we needed - he needs to listen to the problem. His surprise at the wheels issue, and especially saying it is a 'per aircraft' thing again, proves they are disconnected in some ways. Disappointing.

You are right. I now quickly went through 15-20 YT videos from 4y back or older, all showing AIG or FSLTL (or even default) AI traffic and all of them show the issue. Not a single video found without showing the issue, neither for MSFS2020 nor for 2024. That is how sometimes memories play tricks, no?

BTW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ode0UxFL_A

Above video proofs (once again) that also the default AI planes from Asobo suffer from the very same issue. You can see missing landing gear all over the place in this video. But what is puzzling (and always was) is that obviously not every model is affected identically, means at the same view distance and some models "loose" the front gear first and way before the main gear while other models "loose" all gear at once. So something is off (but that is no new thing...).

10 years ago reaching 30fps on P3D was an achievement with maybe 1/10 of the visual quality we are getting today on MSFS. And everyone was complaining about lack of optimization.

Today we have the most beautiful sim , reaching 120fps if needed at ultra settings flying complex aircraft (un-imaginable 10 years ago) but here we are moaning because I can't see nose landing gears on AI aircraft.....

give me a break

4 hours ago, Farlis said:

He is totally correct. I use the AIG packages and almost none of the included aircraft suffer the problem. But a few select ones do very much. It's particularly bad with the 787.

IIRC the 787 family hasn't been updated to 2024 standards.

Reminder that AIG doesn't own all the models, they just have permission to distribute them, so it's up to the actual model makers to do that.

36 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Above video proofs (once again) that also the default AI planes from Asobo suffer from the very same issue. You can see missing landing gear all over the place in this video. But what is puzzling (and always was) is that obviously not every model is affected identically, means at the same view distance and some models "loose" the front gear first and way before the main gear while other models "loose" all gear at once. So something is off (but that is no new thing...).

It seems to depend on the size of the aircraft as well.

Which does line up with the LOD explanation in this Q&A

Edited September 17Sep 17 by Tuskin38

9 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

C210T is more interesting, with c337 genuinely cool (what I’d give for an A2A 337!). 🤙

Yes please to both! And yes, I'm fully aware (as I'm sure @UrgentSiesta is) that Carenado does both, but I just can't put up with Carenado level implementations these days.

Scott

1 hour ago, AnkH said:

You are right. I now quickly went through 15-20 YT videos from 4y back or older, all showing AIG or FSLTL (or even default) AI traffic and all of them show the issue. Not a single video found without showing the issue, neither for MSFS2020 nor for 2024. That is how sometimes memories play tricks, no?

BTW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ode0UxFL_A

Above video proofs (once again) that also the default AI planes from Asobo suffer from the very same issue. You can see missing landing gear all over the place in this video. But what is puzzling (and always was) is that obviously not every model is affected identically, means at the same view distance and some models "loose" the front gear first and way before the main gear while other models "loose" all gear at once. So something is off (but that is no new thing...).

That could be a simple case of the LOD of one model having slightly greater detail at distance than another model.

What a coincidence, Age of Empires III (also published by Microsoft) just had a DLC called "The Baltic Powers", also featuring the Polish.😀

Would have loved to see the Caribbean or the Aegean Islands/Greece, but any addition is welcome.

1 hour ago, Tuskin38 said:

Which does line up with the LOD explanation in this Q&A

47 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

That could be a simple case of the LOD of one model having slightly greater detail at distance than another model.

I doubt, because if I remember correctly, AIG did run tests with no LOD at all, meaning the planes are loaded in their full glory even at a very large distance, yet the culling of the landing gear was unaffected. Believe me, if it would be related to LOD, AIG or FSLTL would have presented a solution long time ago. It is not (only) related to LOD, that is why it is almost impossible to solve it for them. That is why Asobo shoud adress it...

And no, the size of the AI aircraft can not be a factor, in my sim, the 737 and the A320 show completely different behaviour, they have almost the same size. And e.g. the 767 model I have is pretty bad and "loses" main and front gear at very close distance, while the E175/E195 planes are amogst those who at least have the main gear visible to a reasonable distance (but they do "lose" the front gear at close distance).

1 hour ago, ttbq1 said:

10 years ago reaching 30fps on P3D was an achievement with maybe 1/10 of the visual quality we are getting today on MSFS. And everyone was complaining about lack of optimization.

Today we have the most beautiful sim , reaching 120fps if needed at ultra settings flying complex aircraft (un-imaginable 10 years ago) but here we are moaning because I can't see nose landing gears on AI aircraft.....

give me a break

You clearly do not have a clue what is important to other flight simmers, so I am not going to waste my time trying to explain it to you.