Eziocin

HI, I have tested Primo Cache and I have noticed some improvement in texture loading and general smoothness. Just one question: do you use default settings on Primo Cache ? From the post above I assume you use 4kb blocks. I also assume you are using "read only" strategy" ....How much RAM are you reserving to be used by Primo Cache ? I have tested it on a 2 hrs flight (using NGX, UTEur, FTXG and ASN with FEX2 clouds and sky textures @DXT5/1024) and I have seen on the Cache control panel that there has been a Cache Hit Rate of 60% (meaning that out of the total readings from the FSX disk, 60% were read from the cache). I was expecting something more in terms of hit rate, considering that FSX is installed on a separate SSD from the OS....what is your experience on this ? How much hit rate do you usually have ? Thanks Regards

Looking at the "history" of your PC I would suspect that something may have happened when they reset the BIOS. So I would restart from there and have a close look at the various BIOS settings. Is there a chance the CPU integrated video processor is overriding the graphic cards ? Good luck ! Regards

That's my point....Debug Window was indicating moderate turbulence and in absolutely no way in RW moderate turbulence causes such IAS changes.....

Same story here....I was flying the NGX into an approach to EGLL yesterday in IMC conditions with moderate turbulence (as reported by ASN debug window) in clouds, and there were huge speed fluctuations. Although not a RW commercial world pilot (I have a PPL) I have spent hundreds of hours in commercial aircraft cockpit during my previous job, and I have never seen something like this. On final, @flaps40, my IAS was jumping like crazy back and forth from 147 kts to 190 kts....welcome to turbulence effects but they seem to me a little bit too much...! I will try and play with settings a little bit and report back... Regards

Problem solved. I had left Opus Turbulence motion option checked in the Live Camera settings. Unchecking it has eliminated the "constant turbulence". I have checked also the debug window as you suggested and now I can confirm that the aircraft is being bumped by turbulence when turbulence is reported and the instruments reflect aircraft turbulence bumps. Now having Opus for Camera views and DHM, but leaving turbulence motion unchecked, seems to be working fine... Regards You were right...! See above... Regards

Which ground textures did you use.....? Excellent shots...!!

Ok...thanks for the feedback. I will do some homework tonight..! I have narrowed it down to two possible reasons: it should be either a conflict with Opus camera view/DHM or some issue with FSUIPC (I use a networked set up and the current FSUIPC versions are reported to create some problems in such set up).. Thanks anyway for letting me know your experience. With respect to the patchwork clouds on overcast I didn't know it was Shade related. Have been using Shade since it was released and I'd hate to dismiss it, but I also have these patchwork clouds and they are horrible...! Regards

Kostas, thanks for your feedback... Ref performance during cloud redraws, I actually have 2XSGSS on Nvidia Inspector settings....will try to roll it back to a less heavy setting to see if it makes the difference. Ref. FSUIPC compatibility, do you confirm that 4.926 is still creating issues on a networked configuration ? Regards

Following up my previous post on my experience with ASN compared with Opus, after a few more days of testing I would like to add the following observations: 1) ASN tends to be heavy on FPS during cloud redraws. It is probably due to the multiple layers that ASN is using simultaneously during redraws to prevent sharp cloud transitions. I am using FEX2 DXT5 clouds @ 1024 resolution, so in theory nothing that my I72600K @4.8Ghz + GTX680 shouldn’t be able to cope with. Nevertheless I have seen that during cloud redraws, i.e. immediately after weather update download, I have significant FPS drops that stay on fluctuating for about 2-3 minutes and then everything comes back normal. 2) I confirm that, apart from the above, cloud transition is definitely amazing….no sharp changes, no wind shift…..excellent indeed, I needn’t to say more…! 3) “Cloudscapes” depiction by ASN is definitely the best I have ever seen in many years of flight simulation. 4) Visibility graduation from surface to high altitude in my opinion needs some tweaking. I think a better depiction of the haze layer seen from the above should be worth being considered for future releases. IMHO the terrain tends to remain too “clear” even at high altitudes. 5) Turbulence needs some tweaking: currently, turbulence is always present from take off to landing, and there is very little difference between inside and outside clouds. In cruise conditions there is a constant level of turbulence during every flight which is not realistic. It is not related to Opus DHM settings (I have used Opus for Camera views and DHM only). 6) Turbulence effects are NOT reflected on Instrumentation. Despite what reported by others in this thread, I cannot see roll, pitch, and bank indicators moving during turbulence. I believe ASN has still a great growth potential but still needs some tweaking. I am certain that Damian and his team will make it.. Regards

OK...thanks a lot... Have a good night..!!

Thanks for your reply...Zurich V2 from FSDT is one example. Yesterday it was quite foggy with very 150 mt RVR. The fog condition depiction ws perfect Opus)and you could barely see 100 mts ahead, but there were no taxiways signs on. Even the runway centerline lights were off. The only lights on were the runway side lights. Regards

Addon airports mainly...

This is what I would expect to happen, but in my case only the rwy lights are on in IMC, not the taxiways...

Hi, this is most likely not a new subject. A couple of questions on the subject issue: 1) Is there a way to avoid the repeating cloud patterns as seen in the shot ? 2) I find the dark grey areas in the clouds when seen from above to be quite unrealistic. I may see grey clouds looking at them from below, but usually not from above. I don't know if this is coming from something wrong in my set up, or if it is caused by the way FSX draws the clouds, or if it is related to the cloud set (the one in the shot is from FEX2, but it happens also using REX2) . If the answer is the last one, can someone suggest a cloud set which makes clouds appear mostly white when looked from above ? Thanks

welcome...!

Does anyone know if there is a possibility to have airports taxiways lights on during daylight hours in case visibility is very low ? It might be helpful during full IMC conditions (foggy with reduced visibility on the ground) to have all ligthings switched on (as in real life) but I don't know there is some FSX limitation that prevents it. Thanks Regards

Does anyone know if there is a possibility to have airports taxiways lights on during daylight hours in case visibility is very low ? It might be helpful during full IMC conditions (foggy with reduced visibility on the ground) to have all ligthings switched on (as in real life) but I don't know there is some FSX limitation that prevents it. Thanks Regards

I had the same problem some time ago and I read somewhere that in order to fix the problem I had to reindex the MTL. I did it and the problem was solved. Give it a try.... Regards

I don't know about Vatsim, as I fly on Ivao. On Ivao, european countries such as Germany, France, Spain, UK and Switzerland are pretty much covered, sometimes starting from Delivery up to Control/Radar. True, you don't always have a full ATC coverage throughout the entire flight (it also depends on the time of the day you fly), but in the end I accept having some ATC "gaps" enroute provided that departure/arrivals are covered by "real" ATC, rather than having the entire flight managed by a synthesised voice... Apart from the default FSX ATC I once used to have Radar Contact, which is not bad (probaby the best ATC addon for FSX), but I gave it up and uninstalled it once I started flying online. Regards

Forget about ATC addons and try online flying.... Once you get in there and become familiar with procedures and communications you'll never fly again without it.. Regards

From what I understand about how the two systems work, turbulence effects are triggered only by their own weather engine, so the turbulence effects I see using ASN are not generated by Opus Live Camera (even if Opus Live Camera is active), simply because Opus, with Live Weather disabled, does not know where the turbulence area is. I suppose that using ASN for weather and Opus for cameras only, causes Opus LC to generate effects for ground roll, engine vibrations and in general evertyhing not related to weather conditions, while the turbulence shake is generated by ASN. If this is correct, then turbulence effects in Opus are modelled in order to reflect aircraft shaking also in the instruments, while in ASN they are not. But again, I am not sure my understanding is correct. Regards

Yesterday I tried to make a comparison between ASN and Opus. I have been using Opus with full satisfaction for the last year and I was curious to compare it with ASN, after all the hypes and comments following its recent release. To run this test I used Opus beta 3.38.0 and ASN trial version. Both Opus and ASN settings were default ones. FSUIPC version 4.924a with weather settings off. The configuration was a networked one, i.e FSX on the main desktop and ASN/Opus on a networked laptop. The route was EDDM-EGKK @ FL320 using the NGX -800 and the weather was rich of interesting situations: foggy with 300 mts rwy visibility on both airports, low overcast on both airports and a series of variable conditions enroute, ranging from overcast to cavok, which gave me the opportunity to see how the two products performed in terms of cloud transitions. The two flights were done one immediately after the other in order to have the weather conditions as consistent as possible between each other. On the first flight I used ASN for the weather and Opus for Live Camera (Live weather disabled), on the second flight I used only Opus both for weather and cameras. Overall both products are outstanding, with some areas where IMHO one is better than the other and viceversa. Ground movements with reduced visibility: Great depiction of the foggy weather from both products. ASN seemed to give a slightly thicker fog but overall the differences were really minor. Climb: Climb until 3000 ft was done in full IMC conditions. Breaking out of the clouds was slightly more subtle and gradual with ASN but overall very realistic in both cases. Enroute: Absolutely no wind shift and no clouds popping or noticeable cloud transitions for ASN (very impressive indeed). Some instances of minor wind shifts and clouds popping for Opus. Descent/Approach and Landing: Same as above. The weather turned from cavok above the Channel to ovc in EGKK area with amazing smoothness with ASN and just slightly less smooth with Opus. No wind shifts in either case. The final ILS approach on rwy 26L was flown with zero visibility and rwy becoming visible only at 150 ft agl. Again, ASN gave a very thick and solid ovc layer while Opus left some “holes” here and there, but this may have been caused by weather conditions not being exactly the same from one flight to the other (the two final legs were flown at about 2 hrs difference between each other). Turbulence effect: I prefer the Opus one, as it can also be “seen” on the instruments (needles oscillating, heading, roll and pitch indicators actually moving due to the aircraft shaking), while with ASN the instruments are rock steady. ASN also seemed to give a too strong turbulence effect, but this may have been a consequence of having at default settings the option to enhance turbulence effect selected on. Visuals: The way the low altitude haze layer is depicted in Opus is second to none, while ASN skies seemed to me to be a little too much “clean” when looking down. From FL320 the ground seemed to be too much clear than I have ever seen in real world. Maybe it is just a matter of playing around with visibility settings. As already said above, overcast depiction seemed a little bit more “thick and solid” with ASN. FPS impact: No noticeable differences between the two products. Performance wise, running with the weather engine on a networked laptop has been my preferred solution for a long time now and I did not notice any difference between ASN and Opus Conclusions: Both products give a very realistic depiction of the real weather with some areas where one is slightly better than the other: HiFi guys seem to have found the holy grail for wind shifts and cloud popping issues with Opus slightly behind but on the right track as well; Opus visuals and turbulence effects are still number one. Competion is up and running and we, as simmers, will definitely benefit from this. Regards

Buy the NGX, install FS2Crew voice version, get used to manage FS2crew without the control panel visible, get used to fly online with real ATC (Ivao or Vatsim), and.....you will experience the closest thing to flying the real thing that a PC simulation can offer....believe me... Regards

I have been a loyal Hifi Weather software user for year but last year, as many others, I have moved to Opus. A couple of days ago I wanted to give ASN a try and installed the demo version. I left Opus to manage the camera views and DHM only (disable the weather engine) and let ASN manage the weather. Unfortunately I had a CTD (the first one after almost 1.5 year of perfectly flawless flights...I almost forgot what it was... :lol: ) during climb a few minutes after taking off from EDDM, while flying into a broken cloud layer. Just a coincidence ? Maybe...who knows...didn't have the chance for a second run so I will definitely try again. ASN settings were at default. Just a question: is it strictly necessary to update FSUIPC to the latest version (compatibility with ASN is clearly indicated as one of the release notes in the FSUIPC 4.94) ?. Given the short duration of the test I had little time to get exhaustive impressions but the feeling is that Damien and his team made really a good job. Regards

I have raised this subject on the Ivao forums but as of today I got no answer. Can someome explain to me how the Ivap refresh interval in the Online Traffic-Performance Tuning section of Ivap Configuration Tool affects performance ? In particular: 1) In theory the higher the refresh interval the smoother is the movement of the online traffic, but CPU load is also higher: is this correct ? 2) The default refresh interval is 20 Hz. Should it be changed to match with monitor refresh rate (i.e. 60 hz or 30 if using the 1/2 Vsync tweak) to have better results or are they completely unrelated parameters ? Anyone able to shed some light on this subject ? Thanks