Jump to content

SierraDelta

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1,541

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SierraDelta

  2. Posted

    39 minutes ago, Noel said:

    Dave--why do you think that is?  Two people out of a very few different responders here stated that.  <<< READ THAT AGAIN

    Can't speak for everyone, but personally I don't want to waste my time debating with you ad nauseam - pretty sure that goes for a lot of us.

    Concerning the numbers, I just checked my VAs Live ACARS map and of the A320 flights that were active 2 were FBW, 11 were Fenix and 1 FSL. Nobody knows whether the 2 FBW flyers also own the Fenix but still prefer the FBW ...

    Don't bother responding, please.

    • Like 3

  5. Posted

    1 hour ago, BrammyH said:

    I really wish flight duration was a sort column.

    From the release notes in the first post:
    If you require support with the SimBrief Dispatch System or want to make a feature request, please submit a post in the dedicated section of the Navigraph Support Forum where our developers are available: https://forum.navigraph.com/c/simbrief/37

  9. Posted

    2 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

    All of these comments about heat is exactly why after doing a lot of reading watching, I took the chance and went for a 13600k rather than immediately assuming that a possibly toasty 13900 was a necessity.

    In MSFS you will not have any heat problems with a 13900K. Yesterday I measured an average of 64 degrees, max 74 on a 2-hour flight EGLL - LEBL in the Fenix A320. 

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    41 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

    but I definitely have two main threads running at close to 100% utilisation, whereas the others do show some activity, but normally around 50%.

    Sounds like you're on Win10? In Win11 I see all P-cores having an even workload distribution, around 90%, whereas my 8 E-cores are humming along at 10-20% (I have disabled 8 of the E-cores)

    Oh yeah - HT turned OFF after extensive testing. It doesn't make any difference for me at all.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    14 hours ago, eddl said:

    Adding to my idea above: the position priority parameter would allow to place pseudo-static aircraft in maintenance areas or in front of hangars.

    At EGLL I often have aircraft parked in the BA maintenance/hangar area at the eastern side of the airport.

    14 hours ago, eddl said:

    Do you get a normal looking or nearly empty T5 with your file? Do you have auto-adjust on or off? Thank you.

    Absolutely normal looking. T5A has all the A320 family aircraft, T5B and T5C the long-haul aircraft and a few A320s.

  23. Posted

    1 hour ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

    And thats the thing, it's not. All the tweaks and stuff I see in this forum now, I don't even read anymore. No need. 

    Same here. Remember the decades where we were always told that we shouldn't expect to put the sliders full right in FSX, FSX-SE, P3D until a couple (or more) hardware generations later? Those days are over, MS/Asobo are welcome to add more complexity as far as I'm concerned 🙂

    I know that some people refer to this in a slightly negative way as "brute forcing" our way into sim Nirvana - honestly, I don't care. The future is here.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...