Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Avcomware

  • Rank
    Member - 1,000+

Recent Profile Visitors

2,718 profile views
  1. Hi Mark. Thank you for all the improvements. Great work.TV
  2. Hi Mark.>>All I am doing is using a pre-existing bitmap image instead of downloading the actual one from the server. Even if it were possible to somehow create a mask with the excluded areas you would end up with an ugly transition from your new texture to the pre-existing ones in FSX.<<Yes, that part accomplishes some of the desired wants / needs, but what may be helpful is to find a way to leave the layer under the removed / deselected area show through.A couple of way to do this:1-Remove / deselect complete areas, not within the area, like I posted earlier.2-Remove portions of the area, like you do now, but allow the existing layer, in this case the MSFS scenery / water in this case, to show through. What if you fill the area that you skip, now light blue showing, with pure Black? When it gets masked with the Water mask after compiling it should become transparent? I know that it would not be perfect but it would be a lot better than having large blocks filled with something we do not want / need.To summarize:1-if we could remove whole areas,2- fill the portions within the areas that we remove, with pure black may be the best approach? TV
  3. Hi, Mark.I may have missed something, but here is what I got, after the area was compiled as .bgl.Here are the steps that I used to test / run:1-Started FSEarthTiles 102.2-Selected areas to Download and Went to the Exclude Area tab.3-Selected the areas I wanted to Exclude. I intentionally left some areas that were not excluded in the vicinity of the area that I wanted excluded, to see the outcome / end result.4-Started, Downloaded and Compiled.Will the Exclusion / leave area transparent to MSFS, be implemented in your next step?Everything worked fine, selection etc., the end result is that the actual area excluded was filled in with light blue color and Not excluded, did not remain FSX water color / transparent / not altered, if you will. See "Clipboard01.jpg"See pics for a better explanation.Did I miss a step?Great work so far. What we need is to somehow find a way to exclude those Tiles selected in exclusion and leave that area Not compiled / untouched / Like the MSFS water is originally. Selecting an Area / as the areas get selected chosen in the FSEarthTiles, rather than a small section / s, like you do now, would be sufficient and may be easier to implement?I will try to Snap to Tiles and see if that may give a different result? TV
  4. Hi Mark.That would be more than what I was thinking of, but if you can do it it would be better that what I had in mind. Here is an example of what I wanted to implement, exclude the areas after selection of large blocks. Great work. I was unable to get my Visual Studio to install and work properly with Win7 Pro, may try again later. Thanks for your effort. TV
  5. Hi Mark.>>..fake tiles of an area you select. These then get stored in the cache directory. You then recreate your area you want as normal, any 'fake tiles' will then not be downloaded as they will already have been created on your HDD for you.<<Yes, that would be one way to do it. I was thinking about deselecting the "areas" after you selected a large block, marking it as done? in some way and then saving a Partial file then reloading it. The problem is the exclusion, finding the coordinates for the area? TV
  6. Hi Mark and everyone.A good addition, thanks for your effort. It can be difficult to upload to AVSIM, but it's possible, keep trying.One thing I was hoping someone would add is the ability to exclude tiles after you selected a large block, very useful when you work around the coast. I was thinking about doing it but I do not have any recent C on my system. I may try the Visual Studio 6 and see if it works on win 7? This way you don't have to spend the time to Dload, Compile, Remove etc.If you don't mind sending the .zip to my email listed here at AVSIM, I would appreciate it. Thank you, again. TV.
  7. Hi, Geof."……My feeling is this is much good in this sim-but it hasn't been manifested yet for the typical end user-especially those who just want to give it a go from the start and not tweak. To me that is not an unrealistic expectation from the end user to just be able to fly it from its' defaults and get an experience-but from what I can see at least now-lots of tweaking is needed-if one wants to see what this sim is capable of."I agree. They should try to pay more attention to consistency and the ability to use the models As released, without having to tweak them. It is my hope that they will read some of these messages and listen to the customer base. I mainly use the XP for IMC / IFR simulation flying. But it has the potential to be an overall good sim, with some adjustments.Until then all we can do is try to relay some of the changes that we make, in the hope that they help others, and they don't have to reinvent the wheel, so to speak. I could not find any detailed information, at least not compiled in a single place, that explains all the settings, and how they affect what. As I find things I will try to post a file with what I do, to get an acft. to meet some of my expectations / desires. TV
  8. Hi peppy, and everyone."In XP it seems to be exagerated 100 foldLeft turning tendency."You are correct, there are many other exaggerated behaviors in XP, the worst being Ground handling with Xwind conditions. Some of these issues are Controller related and the inability to select individual axis Null zones, which should be addressed, in the near future, I hope.Post here some more info about your System, XP Version, Controller, Aircraft, etc. that you are having problems with, and you can get better help. Until then you can try to see if the information I have listed below helps you, play with the numbers, but if you are Not having a problem in Straight and Level at Cruise, things get more complicated.In general here are some of the things that I modify in order to make the acfts more stable and manageable. You may also want to set your Controls "Joystick & Equipment" screen, and pull all the six sliders, Control response and Stability augmentation, to full right and increase the Null zone, and see if it helps. Using "Plane-Maker.exe"Fix Left turning tendency, Cruise / max speed / 175 Kts Straight and Level Standard>Control Geometry>Trim &Speed> Aileron>Trim Tab adjust +0.012 Was 0.0You can also try to use the Radii setting, here is an example that I used for the RV6:The basic formulas used to dampen some effects, use the x2 or x3 depending on how much travel / how twitchy the acft. is, you have in your controllers:Pitch_Radius = (wing_span * 0.15)*2Yaw_Radius = ((Pitch_Radius + Roll_Radius) * 0,66)*2Roll_Radius = (total_length * 0.18)*2Radii Rv-6 pitch-4.90, yaw 5.20 rol 2.50 CG Rv-6 long -.70 .00 .70 vert .00TV
  9. Hi Alex and everyone.I completely disagree. If payware would pay for their advertising and bandwidth, then maybe, otherwise NO.There seem to be fanatics out there that cause nothing but problems when someone has a problem, and complains about the product, and Yes that includes some of the developers themselves.Why should AVSIM pay for bandwidth, monitor the Forums etc.? Keep it what was intended to do and let the Developers pay for their advertising and support. I see a lot of people here spending time and bandwidth giving tech support for pay products. If they are in business to make money, then they should pay for it. I see many developers using the knowledge and expertise of the board members, starting as Freeware then they take the product Payware, just wondering if they ever went back to people that helped them and shared any of the profits?NO Payware, please. TV
  10. Hi, jahman.This thread is going off topic, but I want to clarify some of the misunderstandings about the
  11. Hi, jahman.>What 2 logical drives on one single physical drive does is make sure the files are physically *very far* from each other on the disk platters. When both logical drives are being accessed simultaneously (as would be the case when running FSX) the disk heads would be thrashing back and forth from one logical drive to the other and back and the time wasted could be in the order of 25 mSec for a full back-and-forth (compare that with the time average rotational latency of a Western Digital Raptor 10,000 rpm HDD of about 1/20th of 1 mSec, i.e. 500x faster!)
  12. Hi Nbouc.I am glad you solved your problem. Isolating, as much as possible, narrows the items you have to deal with. It sounds like you know what you are doing, it
  13. Hi, Nbouc.We will need a lot more info on the setup to give you better feedback, like is it a new installation of FS on the new drives, or is it copied from the old drives? Are you running the same Fsconfig file, the same background Tasks etc.?In the mean time you can try to Benchmark your drives by using HD Tach, or HD Tune, both are free utils, to compare just the Drive transfer rate without other things running that may affect performance. Also post your Logical drive config. From My Computer, A,B C, D size etc.Many things can affect IO transfer, but keep your Partitioning, that is a good thing, and if you plan it right, select a size for OS only around 10GB you can easily make backups and restores, if your OS / C: Logical drive goes bad you just loose your OS and so installed programs, not all your other Data, assuming you save it on D:.You may want to look at Your BIOS and see if your drives are configured properly? The most likely cause is a BIOS or some hardware configuration problem. Post here again after you run your Benchmarks. TV
  • Create New...