Jump to content

n666eo

Frozen-Inactivity
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    40

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by n666eo

  3. Posted · Edited by n666eo

    18 hours ago, Dave_YVR said:

    Incorrect, there is no GS at Fox Harbour and the accident was directly related to the eye to wheel height differences between types.  

    http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2007/a07a0134/a07a0134.html#3.0

    Papi angles and ILS gp angles are not always the same.

    Given the link you posted, no. The eye to whell height was just a factor, but not the cause.

    " The flight crew members flew the approach profile as they had done in the past on the smaller Bombardier Challenger 604 (CL604), with no consideration for the Global 5000 greater aircraft eye-to-wheel height (EWH), resulting in a reduced TCH "

    Reduced TCH doesn't mean crash...

    " The abbreviated precision approach path indicator (APAPI) guidance, although not appropriate for this aircraft type, would have assured a reduced main landing gear clearance of eight feet above threshold. At 0.5 nm, the pilot flying (PF) descended below the APAPI guidance, further reducing the TCH. "

    I guess, flying TOO LOW compared to what the APAPI indicates sounds more like a cause... Specially when the APAPI would have kept the aircraft on a clear glide path (even with reduced clearance to obstacles).

    This accident is directly related to poor airmanship, flying deliberately too low on glide path, at low energy, without correcting (trust). I guess the landing was even shorter than they expected...

  4. Posted · Edited by n666eo

    Hi all,

    I think there is a lot of confusion on Download vs Streaming here. Some services can stream a movie or a game to your computer. In both cases, all is sent through the connexion is 30 or 60 1080p or 1440p photo. For a movie, no big deal. For a game, that means some high end computers are running at the streaming service to actually run the game, and you are just looking at the result.

    Sending only the scenery will NOT be easier. MS will need to send A LOT of high resolution ortho pictures that your computer will process to draw the scenery. That means A LOT more data than just streaming screens like a movie.

    Simple test : compare a full resolution RAW screenshot of your favorite sim, with all the data needed to draw this screen : textures and model of the cockpit, mesh, ortho scenery just for what's in sight, flight model, 3D objects visibles, etc... All these data will weight a hundred times more than the screenshot... That's the difference between "streaming" data for the game in your computer to process, and actually streaming the game.

    And I don't think MS will kindly run thouhands of computers to stream the game to every user... Or it will cost us 40$ a month just to use the base sim...

    Best regards,

    Tom

    • Upvote 1

  9. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Motormike said:

    I know ;) Just a hint how Software should always function

     

    Yes ! At least, ChasePlane should have an offline mode (should be totally offline for me...) so we are able to install even an older version in case of server trouble. 

    I will be out of my PC for some weeks tomorrow, and I haven't been able to use the sim because of the poor reliability of this software... It's a "no-go". The next time on my PC I will probably reinstall EzDok. Not as good as ChasePlane, but at least it works...

    • Upvote 1

  14. Posted

    Hi again,

    I've just installed P3Dv4, and CP is working properly on this version of the simulator. So it seems that there is something wrong with P3Dv3, but as the sim is working properly except for ChasePlane, I would like to avoid uninstalling... 

    Do you have an idea of what can cause the problem in P3Dv3 ?

    Thanks for your help.

    Best regards,

    Thomas

  15. Posted

    Hi all,

    I'm having an issue with ChasePlane since 2 or 3 days : The software starts normally, connect to P3D when this one is starting, but as soon as the flight is launched, CP crash immediatly... I've tried versions 0.2.50, 0.2.108 and today 0.2.118. The only difference is with v0.2.50, CP doesn't crash and close, but the connect symbol (top left corner of the window) blink between red and green rapidly.

    I haven't change anything between before and after the crash appears, except installation of Heron's Nest 2 scenery from iBlueYonder, that is uninstalled now.

    Also when I click on "Regenerate Airport Data", CP says "scenery.cfg not found". The scenery.cfg file is present in ProgramData\Lockeed Martin\Prepar3D v3.

    If it can help, the event logger of windows has 3 entries :

    Application : ChasePlane_Bridge.exe
    Version du Framework : v4.0.30319
    Description : le processus a été arrêté en raison d'une exception non gérée.
    Informations sur l'exception : System.Exception
       à ChasePlane_Bridge.MainWindow.A()
       à ChasePlane_Bridge.MainWindow.A(System.Object, ChasePlane_Bridge.MessageReceivedEventArgs)
       à ChasePlane_Bridge.PipeClient.A(ChasePlane_Bridge.MessageReceivedEventArgs)
       à ChasePlane_Bridge.PipeClient.a(System.IAsyncResult)
       à System.IO.Pipes.PipeStream.AsyncPSCallback(UInt32, UInt32, System.Threading.NativeOverlapped*)
       à System.Threading._IOCompletionCallback.PerformIOCompletionCallback(UInt32, UInt32, System.Threading.NativeOverlapped*)
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Nom de l’application défaillante ChasePlane_Bridge.exe, version : 1.0.0.0, horodatage : 0x59472e01
    Nom du module défaillant : KERNELBASE.dll, version : 6.1.7601.18798, horodatage : 0x5507b87a
    Code d’exception : 0xe0434352
    Décalage d’erreur : 0x000000000001aaad
    ID du processus défaillant : 0x17e4
    Heure de début de l’application défaillante : 0x01d2e996e5698434
    Chemin d’accès de l’application défaillante : D:\Temp\ChasePlane_Bridge.exe
    Chemin d’accès du module défaillant: C:\Windows\system32\KERNELBASE.dll
    ID de rapport : f1699bc4-558a-11e7-942c-001a4d4ae63b

    ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Récipient d’erreurs 633218460, type 30
    Nom d’événement : CLR20r3
    Réponse : Non disponible
    ID de CAB : 0

    Signature du problème : 
    P1 : ChasePlane_Bridge.exe
    P2 : 1.0.0.0
    P3 : 59472e01
    P4 : ChasePlane_Bridge
    P5 : 1.0.0.0
    P6 : 59472e01
    P7 : 7
    P8 : 32e
    P9 : System.Exception
    P10 : 

    Fichiers joints :
    D:\Temp\WER9B64.tmp.WERInternalMetadata.xml

    Ces fichiers sont peut-être disponibles ici :
    C:\Users\n666eo\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportArchive\AppCrash_ChasePlane_Bridg_2d9fcf2425dfe69127297d62721c39996e3951e_16bcb569

    Symbole d’analyse : 
    Nouvelle recherche de la solution : 0
    ID de rapport : f1699bc4-558a-11e7-942c-001a4d4ae63b
    Statut du rapport : 0

    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    I've tried to remove the last scenery, delete the Prepar3d.cfg, uninstall/install ChasePlane, nothing works... Do you have any idea of what to test ?

    Thank you very much for your help !

    Thomas

  17. Posted

    Hi,

    Sorry I'm not helping, just saying that I'm having the same kind of trouble... Sometimes it's impossible to restart Chaseplane properly. It behaves like the simulator is running but no flight is lauched (no presets for example). 

    It looks like Simconnect is disconnecting. GSX is off too, etc... The sim is running along. 

    It doesn't happen when Chaseplane is not launched. And the problem appeared yesterday.

    Best regards,

    Thomas

  18. Posted

     

     


    The combination of HDR lighting, volumetric fog, cloud shadows and terrain shadows isn't a very very small difference.

     

    Good for you you can run the sim with these options. I can't (and I'm not the only one).

  19. Posted

    Steve's Dx10 fix is 30 bucks alone... And doesn't give you the shadow and lighting P3d has. Also, if you don't have fsx, you haven't already invested in legacy addons... So you could choose now which you will grow with. With directx 12 and other technologies on the horizon (occulus rift, 64bit...etc), P3d is the future.

     

    If you use these points, you would choose X-Plane for the future. Exactly the same points, without remaining on an old FSX base as P3D... ;)

  20. Posted

    I'm more on the FSX side.

     

    - long time experience that solve every problem on every hardware.

     

    - better perfomances for the same graphics. Better graphics in P3D but with poor performaces

     

    - DX10 Scenery Fixer by Steeve add cockpit shadows to all add-ons (people tend to forget that FSX in DX10 mode already included cockpit shadows well before P3D...) and a full DirectX10 support, so the difference between FSX and P3D is very, very, small.

     

    - More compatible add-on for FSX, and some that I will never leave (RealityXP as an example)

     

    Summary : more good points for FSX. The only point for P3D is graphics, and using DX10 Scenery Fixer makes the difference so small that there is no point in P3D. But I use P3D from time to time, just to check my opinion is not changing... ;)

  21. Posted

    The percentage are misleading. It's not 72% of people having simulators that use FSX. It just says that, among the people using FSX, 72% are using it as their main simulator.

     

    Changing from 78% to 72% does absolutely NOT mean that FSX declined. Speculation : let say that in 2014 you have 6000 people using FSX, and 3900 of them use it as their main simulator. The percentage would have been 65% instead of 72%. A big decline compare to 2013 with 78% ? Absolutely NOT ! There would have been a lot more people using FSX in 2014, even as their main simulator.

     

    It's what I think is misleading with those percentage. It just says : among people actually using FSX, how many use it as their main simulator ? That give no idea about is there more or less people using FSX ? For that, you have to go back to the raw numbers, and do the calculation from the total number of simmers replying to the survey, not only to the FSX question.

  22. Posted

    The statistics correctly show that of the 2290 who responded to the FSX question 1662 (72%) said they used it for most of 5 Most Time.

     

    It's not clear how the statistics deal with respondents who have multiple simulations installed - FSX and P3D for example.

     

    Yes, exactly. I didn't said that the numbers are not correct. Only that they don't give much information (as they are given). I think most people here are interested about the distribution of simulators in the community.

     

    With this calculation, you can have 100% of P3D. But it doesn't mean that everybody is using P3D, only that all the people that have P3D use it as their main simulator, even if there are only 10 people using P3D.

     

    It's always very hard to deal with numbers... You can make them say everything you want...

     

    My post was about the post of Rob that said :

    "EDIT: P3D up from 14% in 2013 to 33% in 2014 ... FSX declined from 78% to 72% ... "

     

    The numbers does not say that.

  23. Posted

    Hi everybody,

     

    Using raw data, I find different numbers. The percentage shown in the raw data are a bit odd : it says that 72% of people that are using FSX, use it at their main simulator, and that 33% of people using P3D use it as their main sim. 

     

    That doesn't mean that 72% of simmers use FSX as their main sim.

     

    2557 people have replied to this question. And 1662 of them use FSX as their main simulator. That means about 65% of simmers use mainly FSX. 

     

    And 347 use P3D as the main sim. That means about 15%. For XP10 we got about 6%.

     

    In 2013 it was 71% FSX, 4% P3D, 3% XP10.

     

    **** This part is only SPECULATION ****

     

    For FS9 the numbers dropped from 16 to 9%. We can guess that those simmers probably went directly from FS9 to P3D --> Here are 9% more for P3D. ;) So we can expect than less than 5% moved from FSX to P3D in the last year.

     

    Best regards,

  25. Posted

    Hi James,

     

    your calculation is for percentage not degrees. With this calculation you have to use 5% slope : 5 ft in altitude for 100 ft in distance. That the same as 3 degres angle.

     

    See here for so details.

     

    Regards,

     

    Thomas

×
×
  • Create New...